兩岸限制人身自由通報機制之政經分析，1987-2020

自1987年兩岸開放交流後，兩岸限制人身自由通報已成為兩岸人民不可或缺的人權保障措施，不僅是維持兩岸交流秩序的重要機制，也是當事人開啟救濟的前提要件。然而，由於通報機制同時兼具人道關懷及統戰目的，使其在發展過程中，往往伴隨著兩岸政治、經濟、社會、文化及意識形態的演化而變遷。因此，本文採用「歷史結構觀點」及「政治經濟學觀點」為核心概念，向三個面向延伸。首先，從兩岸政經發展角度，看通報機制在兩岸歷史結構中之變遷；其次，從兩岸通報機制運作模式之差異，看兩岸政府機關、中介團體及民間團體等行為者所面臨的機會與限制；第三，從不同時期的通報個案或數據比較，看兩岸政經環境對通報機制之實質影響，以掌握整體實存的動態因果關係。透過上述分析研究，本文發現在歷史脈絡下，兩岸政治環境是主導通報變遷之主因，而經濟發展則是維繫通報運行之催化劑，為通報機制提供必要的生存空間。此外，兩岸共同打擊犯罪的成功，也間接推動通報機制形成，是除了政經兩大主因外的次要因素。而在通報機制形成過程中，相關行為者會運用自身稟賦去形塑對自身較為有利之規則，使得通報機制之運作與建立隱含特定「偏差」特性。然而，由於現有通報機制存在兩岸人權觀念落差及欠缺監督、仲裁機制，因而衍生出許多缺失亟待解決，無法完整保障兩岸人身自由權益。最後，本文依據所發現之缺失，提出短、中、長期改善建議，先從可操之在我的地方著手，待兩岸關係回暖或互信基礎穩固後再循序漸進，逐步營造合適環境，以建構更完善的通報機制。

關鍵字

兩岸通報機制；人權保障；兩岸協商；偏差

並列摘要

Since the beginning of cross-strait interaction in 1987, the notification mechanism concerning restrictions on individual liberty has become an indispensable human rights protection measure for people on both sides of the strait. It is not only an important mechanism for maintaining the order of cross-strait interaction, but also a prerequisite for the litigants to initiate judicial relief procedures. However, the notification mechanism serves not only the humanitarian purpose but the united front strategy, it is affected by the cross-strait politics, economy, society, culture, and ideology with time. Therefore, the main concepts used to analyze in this research are "historical structure" and "political economy," from which the research framework expands to three domains. First, the perspective of cross-strait political and economic development, in which the changes of the notification mechanism in the historical structure is observed; second, the differences of the notification mechanism, in which the opportunities and restrictions faced by actors such as government agencies, intermediary organizations, and non-governmental organizations on both sides of the strait is observed; Third, the comparison of relevant cases or data in different periods, in which the impact of the cross-strait political and economic environment on the notification mechanism is observed. This research finds that the cross-strait political environment is the main factor of the notification mechanism changes, and economic environment is the factor that facilitates the operation of the notification and keeps the notification mechanism functional. The success of combating cross-strait crime, which is the secondary factor in addition to the above two factors, has also indirectly accelerated the formation of the notification mechanism. Besides, actors involved will make the rules based on their own interests, and therefore the operation and establishment of the notification mechanism includes certain "bias". However, due to the different standard concerning human rights between the two sides and the lack of supervision as well as the arbitration in the existing notification mechanism, the right and freedom of the people on both sides cannot be fully protected. Finally, this research proposes short-term, mid-term and long-term suggestions for improving the shortcomings discovered. Starting from what we can control, waiting for the cross-strait relations to revive, solidifying the mutual trust and creating a proper environment for completing the notification mechanism step by step.