兩岸毒品犯罪適用死刑之研究

The Study on Death Penalty for Drug Offences between China and Taiwan

楊俊樂(Jiunn-Yueh Yang)

《藥物濫用防治》 5卷3期 (2020/09) Pp. 93-125

https://doi.org/10.6645/JSAR.202009_5(3).4

摘要

毒品犯罪在台灣依毒品危害防制條例有得以處死刑之規定，大法官解釋更一向肯定毒品犯罪處死刑之合憲性，中國大陸在毒品犯罪處死刑更是司空見慣，在國際上獨佔鰲頭，在此脈絡下，本文欲以文獻探討之研究方法，了解分析比較台灣與中國大陸在立法上、司法實務上對於毒品犯罪的規範模式的良窳，進而發現在台灣與中國大陸毒品犯罪之態度實源於其所持兩極化刑事政策、寬嚴相濟刑事政策的影響。本文更發現在毒品犯罪的立法規範上，台灣與中國大陸都認為毒品的製造、販賣及運輸等犯罪行為是萬惡之源，要從嚴處罰以從源嚇阻之，最高都得處死刑，但是在司法實務上不論是審判或執行上，則有截然不同的運作模式，臺灣從2002年以後在審判實務上沒有死刑定讞之判決亦無執行之案例，但是中國大陸在國際上對於毒品犯的死刑執行則仍名列前茅，而此與公民與政治權利國際公約及其人權理事會所為一般性意見在國內法的實際規範力有所關係，台灣與中國大陸到底如何適用公民與政治權利國際公約第6條有關生命權的保障，將死刑適用僅限在情節最重大之犯罪的謙抑態度攸關。由此毒品犯罪立法與司法實務的操作背反的探討，本文提出對於毒品危害防制條例的修法建議，冀能對死刑適用有更合憲的規範運作模式。

關鍵字

毒品犯罪 ； 死刑 ； 兩極化刑事政策 ； 寬嚴相濟刑事政策 ； 情節最重大之犯罪

並列摘要

According to Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act, drug offences can be sentenced for death penalty in Taiwan. In grand judicial interpretations, charging death penalty on the drug offences is constitutional in Taiwan; additionally, it is often seen that the drug offences would be sentenced for the death penalty in China. From discussing and comparing pros and cons of legislative and judicial regulations, which practice on the drug offences, between China and Taiwan by literature review, it is found that verdicts on the drug offences in Taiwan are biased by polarizative criminal policy; but in China, they are biased by criminal policy of combining leniency with rigidity. However, from legislative perspective on the drug offences, China and Taiwan both believe that manufacturing, selling or transporting drugs is the root of all evil, it is necessary to restrict it from serious punishments, even death penalty. Nevertheless, either on judicial trials or implements, Taiwan and China work differently. In Taiwan, there is no any death penalty of the drug offences being convicted nor executed since 2002; on the other hand, China still overwhelmingly practices death penalty on the drug offences. These differences are based on how International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Human Right Committee define general comments, which influence on the practical regulations of domestic laws. To evaluate how China and Taiwan employ Article 6 of the ICCPR to protect the right to life of all human beings, where can be reviewed by convicting death penalty only on most serious crimes. Due to strict legislative regulations but loose judicial verdicts of the drug offences, suggestions on the amendments of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act in the study were made to make the convictions of the death penalty being more constitutional.

並列關鍵字

Drug Offences ； Death Penalty ； Polarizative Criminal Policy ； Criminal Policy of Combining Leniency with Rigidity ； Most Serious Crimes