性侵害被害人在刑事審判程序中之經驗及社工功能之研究： 以成年女性被害人為例

The Study of The Experiences from Victims of Sexual Assault in The Criminal Judiciary Proceedings and The Social Worker’s Functionality: Using Adult Female Victims as Examples

吳姿瑩(Tzu-Ying Wu)

指導教授 ： 劉淑瓊

國立臺灣大學/社會科學院/社會工作學研究所/碩士(2010年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2010.02510

摘要

本文旨在瞭解性侵害案件成年女性被害人在刑事審判程序中的經驗，以及社工在其中可以發揮的功能。爰此，本研究以深度訪談作為研究方法，分別訪談四位成年女性被害人，及檢察官、法官、社工各三位，共計十三位受訪者，以藉由多元觀點獲得更全面的資訊。而本文分析架構則根據刑事訴訟法之規定，將審判程序區分為準備程序及審理程序兩大流程，並將後者切割為開庭前、開庭中（交互詰問）及開庭後三個階段進行探討。

首先，在準備程序中，法官主要需確認性侵害案件被告的認罪情形，及與刑事訴訟當事人溝通證據調查等相關事宜。實務上，被害人並非刑事訴訟當事人，因此較少在此階段出現；連帶的，社工也較少在此程序介入並提供被害者服務。然而本研究顯示社工在此階段應協助被害人提前參與訴訟活動，除讓被害人了解審判過程中的各項程序及現有證據狀態，以提供更有利之事證之外；社工並可主動與司法體系溝通，協調被害人權益保護的措施。若被害人發生特殊身心損害，也可提醒檢察官要求法院調查被害人的身心狀況作為輔證。

其次，由於出庭對於被害人而言是相當大的恐懼來源，因此開庭前社工會協助被害者做好行政程序與實質訴訟的準備工作，前者包括介紹法庭環境、安排出庭安全措施及提供情緒支持；後者則包含說明交互詰問程序、提醒及陪伴被害者回顧案情，及協助委任律師。此外，為使被害人得以順利進行交互詰問程序，社政單位亦可開發輔助說明的工具，而社工也應成為促成檢察官與被害者間溝通的催化劑，除讓檢察官瞭解被害者的身心狀況外，也可讓被害者獲得充分的法庭資訊，共同因應交互詰問的挑戰。

再者，審判程序中被害人最重要的角色則為出庭接受交互詰問的證詞檢驗，本研究顯示被害人的出庭經驗卻多屬負面。在交互詰問進行時，陪同出庭的社工可發揮包括協助被害者瞭解法庭活動、提供心理支持、適時協助提出程序異議，及陳述意見等四項功能；社工也在法庭中作為被害人與檢察官之間的橋樑，即時溝通雙方意見。甚者，社工在法庭中或可扮演專家證人及輔佐人角色，前者的功能在提出專家建議作為輔證，後者則使被害人得以順利參與訴訟。最後，在開庭結束後，社工必須提供安全、情緒支持、後續司法與行政協助。

本研究結果顯示，成年女性被害人在刑事審判程序中的困境包括協助資源的缺乏、訴訟地位的弱勢、司法知識的不足，及不友善的司法環境；而協助被害者社工也因為專業能力的不足及專業自信的缺乏，而難以在審判程序中展現應有的功能。對此，本文分別針對性侵害相關制度、防治網絡、機構及個別社工提出建議。對制度的建議包括修正刑事訴訟相關法規、建立對社工服務內涵的共識，及設置刑事訴訟社工服務處；對性侵害防治網絡的建議則有合作開發交互詰問教材、促成體系之間的對話，及建立各項資源的目標及契約規範；對於機構的建議為落實社工在職教育、提升社工自信，以及建立具有延續性的社工服務；而對個別社工的建議則包括提升司法知能及資源管理能力。

關鍵字

性侵害 ； 刑事審判程序 ； 成年女性被害人 ； 被害人經驗 ； 社工功能 ； 交互詰問

並列摘要

The purpose of this article is to comprehend the experiences of adult female victims from sexual assault in the criminal judiciary proceedings, and the functionality that a social worker could perform. Hereunder, the methodology of this study is by means of in-depth interview individually with thirteen respondents, inclusive of four adult female victims, three prosecutors, three judges and three social workers in order to obtain more comprehensive information from diversified points of view. The analysis layout of this article is based on the regulations of The Code of Criminal Procedure to divide the judiciary proceedings into two procedures: preliminary proceeding and judiciary proceeding, while the latter will be further divided into three stages: before cross-examination, cross-examination and after cross-examination in order to facilitate the discussion.

Fist of all, during the preliminary proceeding, the judge has to verify whether a defendant pleads guilty or not in the case of sexual assault, and to communicate with the criminal party regarding evidence examinations. In practice, since the victims are not the criminal parties, they are rarely involved in the trial at this early stage. Consequently, social workers are barely involved in providing services to victims neither. Nevertheless, the study shows that social workers should ahead of time assist victims in participating in litigation activities at this stage. It not only allows victims to get familiar with the procedures throughout the trail, but also to understand the existing status of testimonies in order to furnish more advantageous evidences. For social workers, they can voluntarily communicate with justice systems with regard to protection measures of the victims’ interests. Social workers could also remind a prosecutor to request the court to investigate the victims’ physical and mental condition as the supporting evidence in case of exceptional physical and mental damage on them.

Secondly, since the appearance is fearful for a victim, social workers would assist victims in preparation for administrative proceedings and practical criminal suits before the court day. The former includes introduction of the court’s surroundings, arrangements of safety measures for appearance, and emotional support provision; while the latter comprises interpretation of cross-examination procedures, reminding and accompanying the victim for retrospection of the legal case, and assistance in designating a counsel. On the other hand, in order to facilitate a victim to proceed the cross-examination, the authorities of social affairs should develop related tools for illustration. Moreover, social workers should act as a catalyst for communication between a prosecutor and a victim. It not only can assist the prosecutor in understanding the victim’s physical and mental condition, but also allows the victim to obtain adequate information from the court so as to manage the challenges during cross-examination.

Thirdly, the main purpose of a victim’s appearance in the judiciary proceeding is to undertake the testimony inspection during cross-examination. Nevertheless, the findings of the study shows most of the appearance experiences are negative for victims. Therefore, when accompanying a victim to appear in court, social workers could exercise the following four functions during the cross-examination: Assisting in understanding the procedures during the trial, providing emotional support, raising an objection with regard to procedures properly, and declaring opinions. Furthermore, social workers also act as an intermediary between victims and prosecutors to communicate with the opinions from both sides. On the other hand, social workers could also play the role of expert witnesses or assistants. The functionality of the former is to bring up professional advice for supporting evidence; while the latter is to assist a victim in undertaking the litigation smoothly. In the end, social workers have to furnish safety, emotional support, and to assist in judicial and administrative follow-ups.

The findings of the study point out that the difficulties an adult female victim confronts during the judiciary proceedings contain lack of resources for assistance, disadvantaged litigation position, inadequacy of legal knowledge, as well as the unfriendly environment of judicature. Similarly, social workers also face difficulties in assisting the victims during the judiciary proceedings owing to lack of professional competence and self-confidence. Whereas, this article makes suggestions in the light of sexual assault related systems, prevention networks, organizations and individual social workers. The suggestions for systems include amendment to related regulations in The Code of Criminal Procedure, consensus building about the scope of social work service, and establishment of social worker serving offices for criminal suits. As for the suggestions on prevention networks of sexual assault, developing teaching materials for cross-examination, promoting the communication among systems, and establishing the objectives and contract specifications of all sorts of resources should be made. As to organizations, the study suggests implementing social workers’ in-service education, enhancing social workers’ self-confidence, and building up social service with continuity. With regard to individual social workers, to enhance judicial knowledge and resource management capability are suggested.

並列關鍵字

sexual assault ； rape ； criminal judiciary proceedings ； adult female victims ； experiences of victims ； social worker’s functions ； cross-examination

參考文獻

王珮玲（2010）。警察、檢察官、法官對社工認知之探討：以家庭暴力與性侵害案件處理為例。臺大社工學刊，21，1-54。

王燦槐、吳志光（2001）。性侵害被害者之創傷反應在司法程序中被採用之內涵研究期末報告。內政部委託研究計畫。

王燦槐（2005）。性侵害防治中心在司法流程中的角色－減少性侵害被害人重複陳述作業之評析，亞洲家庭暴力與性侵害期刊，1:1，111-136。

吳文正（2004）。以性侵害犯罪防治法為中心探討刑事法學與精神醫學之交會與整合。國立臺灣大學法律研究所博士論文。

吳志光（2001）。性侵害案件受害者創傷反應與司法程序。司法改革雜誌，34，41-42。