- 期刊
正義理論與刑罰應報理論之重構
Reconstruction of Justice Theory and Retributive Theory of Punishment
摘要
本文試圖重新建構一個刑罰正當性的理論，為此，需先藉由釐清應報理論與正義概念之間的關係，說明與澄清許多傳統見解上被忽略的問題，本文首先要指出的是，亞里斯多德關於正義的學說，不論是分配正義還是抵銷正義之論述，皆有別於康德和黑格爾的應報觀，尤其是與康德同態報復的主張大異其趣，因此，只有透過重新梳理其間的差異，才能夠為這些理論與概念找到適當的地位與意涵。分析正義理論的結構，可以將其中關於糾正正義與平等原則的意義作進一步的理解，尤其是以現代法治國中的平等原則作為重要的理論基礎，就犯罪與刑罰之意涵作重新的詮釋。犯罪，係透過不法行為牴觸法規範之行為，其片面地破壞社會共同生活成員在法秩序中的平等地位，造成一個失衡的法律關係，由於其行為的方式是濫用其個人之行動自由，就此而言，犯罪者無法運用其理性之能力進行自律，因此，國家需以於司法與執法者的角色介入，以他律的方法導正失衡的法律關係，按照犯罪行為之不法與其所造成的損害暫時限制其自由，此一限制與剝奪即為刑罰。是故，刑罰之意義為，濫用自由者被限制自由，此為糾正正義與平等原則之要求，其具有應報之意義，也內含積極一般預防及再社會化的意義。
並列摘要
This article attempts to reconstruct a theory of the legitimacy of punishment. To this end, it is necessary to clarify the relationship between the theory of retribution and the concept of justice, explain and clarify many traditionally neglected issues. The first point of this article is that Aristotle's theory of justice, the discourse of distributive justice and the justice of offsetting are all different from Kant's and Hegel's view of retribution, especially different from Kant's claim of homomorphic revenge. Therefore, only by reorganizing the differences can we find appropriate meanings for these theories and concepts. This article criticizes Kant's and Hegel's thesis on penalty justice. However, the two philosophers have extremely profound thinking about criminal behavior and unlawfulness, which can supplement the deficiencies of justice theory on these issues. Analyzing the structure of justice theory, we can further understand the meaning of the principle of correcting justice and equality. For those who violate the norms of the law through illegal acts, it is a one-sided destruction of the equal status of the members of society living together in the legal order. The way of this kind of behavior is to abuse one's freedom and cannot be self-disciplined. Therefore, the state intervenes in the role of justice and law enforcement, adjusts the unbalanced legal relationship with other disciplines, and temporarily restricts its freedom according to the damage caused by the illegal act. This punishment also contains the meaning of active general prevention and re-socialization.
參考文獻
延伸閱讀
- 柯耀程（2006）。共同正犯形成之判斷－評刑法修正後之適用與釋字第一○九號之重新詮釋。東海大學法學研究，(25)，1-38。https://doi.org/10.29722/TULR.200612.0001
- 吳景欽（2018）。轉型正義、罪刑法定與國際刑法。人權會訊，(128)，24-29。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=P20150513004-201805-201806120007-201806120007-24-29
- 張瑋麟（2016）。推計處罰與正當法律程序關聯之研究〔碩士論文，國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201614064528
- 吳昀展（2008）。Constitutional Theory。政治科學季評，(18)，31-34。https://doi.org/10.6570/PSQBR.2008.18.5
- 張薰之（2013）。Justice: A World Changing Normative Theory。全球政治評論，(41)，187-190。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=17263786-201301-201303150007-201303150007-187-190