禮刑之間──從供養有闕到遺棄尊親屬

傳統中國社會，向來重視孝道，認為孝是萬善之源，強調孝為百行之首；在《論語》裡，孝又是行仁之本，歷代也競相標榜「以孝治天下」；而孝道的推行又輔以政治力的介入，除表彰並倡導、講習外，對於孝道的實踐無不積極策進；最常見者為誘以名利，凡有孝行者，或旌其門閭、或減免其稅賦、或授予官爵、甚或有罪亦寬貸其刑等，諸如此類，其實例在漢以後歷朝的職官志、選舉志、孝友傳及孝義傳中比比可見。隋唐以降，在「禮本刑用」的立法原則下，以禮尋律。父祖擁有所謂的「教令權」，倘若子孫有違犯父祖的教訓命令行為，或對祖父母、父母，力堪扶養而不扶養者，歷來法律都用刑罰加以懲治，此即指「子孫違犯教令及供養有闕」罪條而言。這種「以孝率法」的禮刑結合方式，固足以促進吏民對於孝的力行，問題是，在時光流轉下，這是永恆不變的「道理」嗎？孝之名實究竟該如何看待？行孝是否為一種片面絕對的義務？有關刑事立法中倫理成分的比例該如何拿捏？凡此，都是饒富爭議而有待釐清的課題。本文擬從縱向的古今源流之變，以唐清律及晚清的變法修律為重心，談談有關該項罪名在傳統中國法制中「禮本刑用」立法方式的歷史意義；另從橫向的中外比較法史觀點，述說有關德、日等國立法例的動向，以明中外時代之異；最後，則以民國九十九年（2010）間《刑法》第294條之一「遺棄直系血親尊親屬罪」的最新修正，探討刑法中倫理情結的異化與再生，以究當前之勢。

關鍵字

儒家思想；中華法系；孝道；供養有闕；遺棄尊親屬

並列摘要

Filial piety, which has long been held in high esteem in traditional Chinese society, is considered to be the origin of all virtues. It is also thought to be the base of Ren (仁) by Confucian Analects, and held as a ruling principle through dynasties. Alongside the political power, filial piety is promoted and practiced overwhelmingly in every way: family honor, tax break, title confering, punishment exemption, etc., which is recorded in Zhi Guan Zhi (職官志, Officialdom Essays), Xuan Ju Zhi (選舉志, Examination Essays), Xiao Yo Zhuan and Xiao Yi Zhuan (孝友傳及孝義傳, Filial subjects Biographies) since Han. Li (禮, morals or ritual propriety) has become the base of penalty system and legislative principles since Sui and Tang. Male lineal ascendants are endowed with the rights of ruling and educating descendants (教令權). According to the law, as long as the instructions are disobeyed or the maintenance is insufficient, penal punishment is applied to the descendants. The code not only combined Li and penalty, but also promotes the practice of filial piety. However, as time gone by, is filial piety still an eternal idea or an absolute obligation? How do we comprehend this ethic idea essentially and make it correspond with the penal legislation more appropriately? Basing on Tang Code, Ching Code and the historical material of late Ching legal reform, this paper shall discuss the traditional ideas and offenses aforementioned. Moreover, the author would take the legislations of Germany and Japan as study examples in the view of comparative law. In the end, this article would like to study the transform and rebirth of current legal ethics in the 2010 Amendment of Article 294-1, Criminal Code of Taiwan.