從參與者觀點探討我國修復式司法理念與運作模式

Exploring the Restorative Justice Concept and Operation Model From the Perspective of Attendees

李孟錡(MENG-CHI LI)

指導教授 ： 許春金

國立臺北大學/社會科學學院/犯罪學研究所/碩士(2016年)

摘要

本研究從修復式司法參與者的實際參與經驗來檢視目前我國修復式司法方案之理念與VOM(Victim-Offender Mediation)運作模式；並以此對照、回應學者過去所提出的執行修復式正義理念與原則。研究目的主要在於了解促進者在執行修復式司法時的理念與運作模式，以及探討參與修復式司法方案的事件當事人的需求、與所經歷與感受到之運作模式。本研究以深度訪談的方式希冀能獲得較具深度的資料。共訪談8人，包含6位參與修復式司法事件當事人、2位修復促進者。
研究結果發現，兩位受訪促進者均認同修復式司法的理念，在實踐上雖然因個人作法有少許差異，但基本上都符合學者提出之修復式正義理念與原則。而在VOM模式進行的過程中，除了受限於部分制度外，受訪修復促進者也大致達成各個階段之原則。在當事人參與經驗的部分發現，多數受訪當事人不是真正了解修復式司法之理念，且部分受訪者實際經歷到的VOM運作過程、促進者角色與實踐上注意的原則是有所偏離的。
研究也發現，因後續協議履行的監督與配套制度不足，加上部分的促進者在VOM程序中並未仔細考量當事人的最佳利益而將達成協議的目標置於優先，故當事人所感受到修復會議程序多是走向協議之達成；如此一來我國VOM的運作模式可能僅能達到類似於民事調解（民間模式）的效果。
本研究建議修復式司法與民事調解應有所別，但在制度上可相互配合。以及促進者教育訓練應落實；各地檢署在修復式司法的培訓要求上應有所要求及落實訓練，才能依靠促進者及陪伴者的專業，撫平傷痛、達成修復。另外在修復程序上應給予充足之時間，以及重新檢視後續協議履行的監督與配套制度的完備。最後應強化修復式司法在民間及各檢署之宣導，除了讓民眾對於修復式司法能更加認識，以及檢署司法人員對之能有深入的了解，將更有利於政策的執行與改善。

關鍵字

修復促進者 ； 修復式司法運作模式 ； 修復式司法理念 ； 事件當事人

並列摘要

This study is to examine the state restorative justice and the Victim-Offender Mediation model through the lens of its attendee’s experience and to form an extensive review on the related studies. It is purposed to gain a better understanding of the role of facilitators, the need of participants, and their experience about the restorative justice system. This study employs in-depth interview method and intends to acquire deeper knowledge of the topic from the eight interviewees that consist of six participants and two facilitators.

The result reveals that the two facilitators both endorse the idea behind the restorative justice and that despite the different approaches they adopt to implement the restorative justice, their ideas and principles stay on track with that of the scholars. During the process of the VOM model, the facilitators have essentially achieved the principles of each stage in spite of some limitation posed by the regulation. While, after probing into the participants’ experience, it is established that most of them do not really get the idea of restorative justice and that some of their perception about the VOM procedure and the role of facilitators contradict with the paradigm of restorative justice.

It also points out that due to the lack of complementary measures and follow-up monitoring, and the facilitators’ misplaced priority in which they prioritize the reaching of agreement rather than the optimal benefit of participants, it makes the participants feel as if the mediation is agreement-oriented and resembles the settlement prescribed by the state civil law(civilian model).

This study recommends that the restorative justice should be distinguished from the settlement while the two different ways of mediation could complement each other and that the facilitator training should be more demanding; The wounds would only heal when facilitators and other related personnel are well-trained. Also, the restorative procedure should take its time and the re-inspection into the follow-up monitoring and complementary measures is required. Lastly, to facilitate the implementation of government policies, restorative justice should be further promoted calling for closer attention of both the public and the prosecutors.

並列關鍵字

facilitator ； restorative justice operation model ； restorative justice concept ； participants

參考文獻

吳景芳（1999）。刑事法研究。臺北：五南。

許春金（2003）。修復式正義的實踐理念與途徑—參與式刑事司法。犯罪與刑事

許春金、陳玉書、黃政達（2007）。調解制度中受調解人修復性影響因素之研究

黃曉芬、張耀中（2012）。試評臺灣具修復式正義精神之相關制度。犯罪與刑事

黃蘭媖（2007）。追尋犯罪被害人的正義之路：從福利到修復、從控制到重分