透過您的圖書館登入
IP:18.226.169.94
  • 學位論文

廢除死刑之法理研究

The Jurisprudence of the Abolition of the Death Penalty

指導教授 : 劉幸義
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


廢除死刑的問題一直以來都是爭論不休,正反方意見僵持不下,甚至各持己見沒有交集,有時爭論的焦點並無任何推論根據,存在的只是情緒訴求。本文欲從法理論的角度來探討死刑存在的正當性,以生命的價值與彰顯生命權的保障作為前提,因為不論贊成死刑或反對死刑,著重的是在生命的議題,本文試想在生命的觀點上,兩者似有交集之處,故從法理論的角度出發,探討生命的價值與生命權落實於憲法、刑法與刑事訴訟法的情形下,死刑是否應該繼續存在於我法體系當中作為處罰的制度。 從維護人性尊嚴與彰顯人的生命價值的立場,人不應該被物化,不應該被當作一個客體,即人必須為了自己存在,不得作為、亦不得貶為國家統治之客體來處理,人性尊嚴雖然是用一種抽象的字眼作為描述,但是根據其內涵還是可以表達出對於身為一個人所應得到的尊重,這是國家作為保護人民時必須體悟的。 生命權是與生俱來的權利,在現代國家被列為國家應保障的首要價值,因此可以推論憲法未將之列舉是有意省略,其應屬於不成文之基本權利,先於國家存在,而不待規定既已存在,再來是刑罰理論上,應報與預防的目的是否能作為死刑制度存在的堅實理由,又「治亂世用重點」的迷思對死刑又有何影響,以及訴訟程序上的制度設計將會導致誤判的可能,這些情況都會引發對死刑制度存在的疑慮。 本文亦以被害人保障為軸,欲探討被害人事後補償的制度、刑事訴訟程序參與權的賦予,以落實被害人權益並彌補其所受損害。 最後考慮台灣特殊的政治背景,在歷史的發展下我們更應該正視制度面的問題,這也是作為本文討論未來台灣廢除死刑的基礎思維之一;另外如果台灣未來廢除死刑可能面臨到替代方案的問題,在權利不能被剝奪的前提下,本文將思考並討論替代方案的可行性與其他需要一併改進的配套措施。

並列摘要


Abolition of death penalty has been a dispute for a long time between those who support and oppose. Sometimes the controversy even doesn't involve any rational basis but just become a emotional allegation. Taking the value of life as premise, this dissertation tries to discuss the legitimacy about the existence of death penalty. Whether supporting or opposing, what counts is the topic of life right. From the aspects of different legal theories in our Constitution, Criminal law or Criminal procedure law, the author therefore analysed if death penalty should keep on existing in Taiwan's legal system. From the stand about the maintenance of human dignity and the demonstration of life value, human should exist for himself instead of being materialized. Despite "human dignity" is an abstract term, its core meaning is about the basic respect a human deserves. And a country should know this to protect its people. Life right is a gifted right, a primary value any modern country should protect. We therefore can infer that the Constitution didn't provide for it purposely because it's absolutely a human right which exists earlier than the country without even mentioning it especially. Furthermore, on the theories about criminal punishment, could prevention or retribution be a firm reason to support the death penalty? Does it work to use heavy penalty to reduce criminal rate? Even the design of criminal procedure may cause the mis-judgement. All above may inevitably make people question the legitimacy about the existence of death penalty. In addition, this dissertation take a chapter to discuss the protection and compensation system of criminal victims. And late but not least, considering the special political background in Taiwan, we should pay more attention to system problems under the development historically, this is also a basic thought to abolish the death penalty in the future. The author also tries to provide other complementary measures and analysed its feasibility if the abolition may inevitably face the problem about replacement projects.

參考文獻


3.王玉葉,歐洲聯盟之死刑政策:一個沒有死刑的世界,哲學與文化第31卷第5期,2004年5月。
5.艾立勤,天主教生命倫理觀的基本領域,神學論集122期,1999年1月。
9.李念祖,刑罰功能與應報理論均應受人道主義制約-對死刑維持論的答覆,全國律師,2006年11月。
20.黃培鈺,孔子人道哲學之述要,興國學報,2005年7月。
30.瞿海源,遏止犯罪、生命價值與死刑:台灣民眾對廢除死刑的態度,台灣社會學刊,2006年12月。

被引用紀錄


陳慧珊(2011)。死刑存廢議題的沉默螺旋現象〔碩士論文,國立中正大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0033-2110201613494812

延伸閱讀


國際替代計量