案件分配、司法中立與正當法律程序－以美國聯邦地方法院之規範為中心

Case Assignment, Neutrality of the Judicial System and Due Process……with Focus on the Federal District Courts of the United States

黃國昌(Kuo-Chang Huang)

《東吳法律學報》 21卷4期 (2010/04) Pp. 155-206

https://doi.org/10.6416/SLR.201004.0155

摘要

「案件分配」此一議題在近時因陳水扁前總統之案件引起廣泛的關注，論者多由德國法之「法定法官原則」加以闡釋。本文旨在檢視美國聯邦法對此議題所採取的規範態度，並藉由對美國聯邦法之說明與檢討，進一步討論美法對我國法所可得之正面啟發與反面警示，同時在此基礎上，對於大法官會議釋字第665號解釋，一方面提出簡要評釋，一方面與美國法進行比較。在聯邦國會之授權下，美國聯邦法院雖然向來認為案件應如何在有管轄權之法院內進行內部分配，屬於法院固有權限得決定之事項，同時，聯邦判例法亦不承認當事人有權要求法院依特定方式進行分案；然而，基於「正當法律程序」之要求，美國法仍承認「案件中立分配」之理念，禁止藉由人為操控案件之分配，以影響訴訟的可能結果，並在法院所制定之分案規則中，努力藉由分案基準之設定予以落實。本文認為，我國憲法雖未明文規定所謂「法定法官原則」，惟釋字第665 號解釋透過憲法解釋，使「案件分配中立理念」成為我國憲法位階的要求，對我國就此問題之規範，作出重要貢獻。不過，在另一方面，釋字第665 號解釋仍殘留尚未解決的重要問題。為一步提昇人民對司法的信賴並充實當事人之訴訟權保障，本文主張應就我國法院分案制度之相關規範與設計，在立法層面上重新檢討整備，筆者並提出若干具體建議。

關鍵字

案件分配 ； 案件分配中立原則 ； 正當法律程序 ； 美國聯邦法院 ； 法官獨立

並列摘要

Due to former President Chen's criminal trial, the subject of case assignment has not only attracted much attention but became a controversial issue recently in Taiwan. Almost all relevant discussions on this subject are based upon the German doctrine of Gesetzlichen Richter. This article purports to examine this issue from a different perspective, discussing the relevant rules regulating case assignment in the U.S. federal district courts and analyzing the attitude expressed in their case law. Moreover, this article also examines the principles established in No. 665 Interpretation of the Taiwan Constitutional Court and compares such principles with the U.S. doctrines. The federal courts consistently hold that the court has inherent authority to decide how to assign cases among judges and a party has no right to any particular procedure for the selection of the judges. Nevertheless, the U.S. law still recognizes that due process requires case assignment based upon the principle of neutrality in or der to prevent manipulation of case assignment to affect case outcomes. The examination of the U.S. law provides valuable insights for the Taiwanese courts. This article argues that while the Taiwan Constitution does not explicitly provides the principle of neutrality of case assignment, the Taiwan Constitutional Court correctly establishes this requirement through the interpretation of the relevant constitutional provisions regarding due process as well as a fair trail. This article further makes a number of suggestions with regard to how Taiwan could reform its system to enforce the neutrality principle and to enhance the public's confidence in the integrity of the judicial system.

並列關鍵字

Case Assignment ； Principle of Neutrality ； Due Process ； the U.S. federal courts ； Independence of Judges

參考文獻

民事訴訟法研究基金會(2004)。民事訴訟法之研討（十二）。臺北:民事訴訟法研究基金會。

李惠宗(2006)。憲法要義。臺北:元照。

林鈺雄(2004)。刑事訴訟法（上冊）。臺北:林鈺雄。

東吳大學法學院(2008)。英美法專用名詞解析。臺北:新學林。

王兆鵬(2009)。法院分案規則合憲性之探討。軍法專刊。55(3)，134-138。