論精神障礙者科處死刑之探討－以建立有效預警機制為中心

An Exploration of the Death Row Prisoner with Mental Disorders in Criminal Punishment: Focusing on the Establishment of Early Warning Mechanism

林金龍(Lin, Chin-Lung)

《軍法專刊》 68卷2期 (2022/04) Pp. 86-104

摘要

隨著近年發生數起精神障礙者涉及駭人聽聞的殺人罪，法院多以「兩公約」規定「不得對精神障礙者判死刑」為理由，犯嫌因此得以脫逃死刑的論罪科刑。法院此舉不僅引起輿論譁然，更掀起社會大眾對於精神障礙者涉犯重大罪行的討論，其中大多以實體法對於精神障礙如何認定為主要討論焦點。值得令人省思的議題，當精神障礙者涉及重大刑事犯罪時，法律機制應該如何設計，始能平衡精神障礙罪犯與被害者的法益，同時可以防範下一個悲劇發生於未然。本文旨在探討對於精神障礙犯罪，以期建立有效之預警機制。本文研究結果認為，對於防範精神障礙犯重罪而言，倘若一直糾結於「兩公約」廢除死刑與否之爭論窘境，不僅無法律實益可言，對於紛爭之解決更是緣木求魚與曠日廢時。準此，在符合法律保留原則之下，政府對於有暴力犯罪傾向的精神障礙者，應該主動與即時揭示相關警示資訊，給一般社會大眾知悉。唯有如此，對於精神障礙者犯罪，不僅能夠發揮預警機制，可以有效預防犯罪於未然。同時，精神障礙罪犯與受害者法益間，彼此也得以相互平衡。

關鍵字

精神障礙 ； 死刑 ； 兩公約 ； 法律保留原則 ； 預警機制

並列摘要

With the occurrence of several murder cases, the judges have mostly cited ICCPR and ICESCR as the reason that the person with mental disorders shall not receive death penalty. Therefore, the person with mental disorders may escape the death penalty in murder case. The court's judgment has not only caused an uproar, but also aroused much public's discussions, which focus on how to identify the person with mental disorders in criminal law. So, the issue worth thinking is how to design a legal mechanism which may balance the legal interests between victims and the person with mental disorders, and prevent it from happening again. The aim of this article is to explore how to create an effective early warning mechanism for the crimes with mental disorders. The research results of this article show that the legal arguments shall not focus on the two conventions (ICCPR and ICESCR) regarding whether or not the person with mental disorders in death penalty. It is better to create the early warning mechanism in legal system. If not, it will be useless for the dispute resolution and losing time. Consequently, about the crimes with mental disorders, the government shall actively and timely disclose relevant information for people under the principle of legal reservation. Only in this way, we can effectively and timely prevent the crimes with mental disorders before they happen again. At the same time, the legal interests can be balanced between victims and the person with mental disorders with each other.

並列關鍵字

Mental Disorder ； Death Penalty ； Two Conventions (ICCPR and ICESCR) ； Principle of Legal Reservation ； Early Warning Mechanism

參考文獻

楊貴智，〈認識刑法責任能力條款－論鐵殺警案與小燈泡案的異同〉，《月旦醫事法學》， 2020 年 12月，第 46 期，頁 14-22。

林志潔，〈論美國法上犯罪主觀要件與精神障礙心智缺陷抗辯：Clark v. Arizona 案之判決評析〉，《歐美研究》，中央研究院歐美研究所，2009 年 12 月，第 39 卷第 4 期，頁 615-670

黃致豪等人，《台灣死刑案件司法精神鑑定實務手冊》，台灣廢除死刑推動聯盟等，2015 年 9月，頁 18，〈https://www.deathpenaltyproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Chinese-version-Handbook-of-Forensic-Psychiatric-Practice-for-Capital-Cases-in-Taiwan.pdf

劉尚志、林三元、宋皇志，〈走出繼受，邁向立論：法學實證研究之發展〉，《科技法學評論》，2006年 10 月，第 3 卷第 2 期，頁 1-48

最高法院 106 年度台非字第 66 號刑事判決。