國際上少年司法體系的變革中,分別有兩項變革是對少年司法產生莫大影響,其一是少年刑事案件重刑化,該重刑化伴隨著檢察官起訴制度的引進,而放棄使用少年保護處遇,在美國法的相關研究中均受到重視;其二即是本文所欲探討轉向制度的興起,該制度又結合社福以及警察體系的關係。該二者制度均破壞了少年司法體系原先追求的柔軟、教育、保護等特質,前者不僅積極破壞,後者甚於捨棄少年司法體系轉而尋求行政機構的援助。相對於其二者的「破壞」,我國少年竟意外地維持其餘1997年修法柔軟的初衷,然而在釋字664之後,國內興起了針對虞犯以及微罪少年透過審前轉向與行政先行的呼聲,企求去標籤化不讓少年太早進入司法系統,其中尤以呼聲極高的吸食第三、四級毒品的虞犯少年為主,關於這點在目前少年事件法尚未將審前轉向權限給予行政單位的前提下,兒童及少年福利與權益保障法以及其他配套法規又將如何因應呢? 在這樣的趨勢下,少年法院該擔當何種角色?而這樣的趨勢是必然抑或是偶然?在刑事政策上我們對於少年處遇賦予如何之期待,上面這些問題均會牽涉到在少年司法體系中少年法院的定 位。對於國內外轉向呼聲的回應本文預先從司法福利制度探討,探討少年司法所具有的柔軟性;接著從系統論出發,進一步補足司法福利制度的不足;最後再引用後現代哲學對於人存在個體性進行反思,進一步正當化少年法院在少年司法體系中之角色。
There are two changes in international juvenile justice which have great effect. One is using adult procedure in juvenile justice, the other is pre-trial diversion. The two destroy the soft foundation of juvenile justice; however, juvenile justice stays soft in Taiwan. But this ”soft foundation” is about to change after the Justice’s declaration of 664, which sought another way for minor delinquency, that is diversion. What is the meanings of the trend of diversion? What is the new role of juvenile justice in Taiwan?What will we expect to juvenile court under diversion program? These questions above are so important that we will discuss it on the thesis. To answer the questions caused by diversion, I try to explain it through justice-welfare system, and the system theory of Luhmann. At last, we will discuss the juvenile’s subjectification in the juvenile court.