- 學位論文
我國「刑事妥速審判法」法制檢視與展望－以第5、7、8、9 條為中心
The Review and Prospective of the ROC Legal Framework of the Criminal Speedy Trial Act－Focusing on Articles 5,7,8,9
摘要
由於兩公約之簽署與其施行法之訂定，及司法院積極推動刑事妥速審判法通過，使我國得以落實保障人民速審權，刑事妥速審判法於我國人權保障之進程實具有劃時代之意義。本法重點有三，分別是(一)第五條：羈押總期限8年、(二)第七條：速審權侵害時的救濟方式、(三)第八、九條：第三審上訴之禁止與限制，本文試探究現行實定法是否有助於「妥」、「速」審判目的之達成，同時期待研究結果可為未來修法者或後續研究者之參考。 本篇論文內容架構安排如下： 第一章：緒論 說明研究動機、研究目的、研究方法、文獻回顧、理論架構與研究範圍。 第二章：外國刑事迅速審判法制介紹 簡介美國、日本、及歐洲人權法院之刑事迅速審判法制，範圍包括：速審權之理論基礎與利益、起算始終點、如何判斷被告憲法上的速審權已受侵害、如侵害被告速審權，應產生如何的法律效果等要點。 第三、四、五章：我國刑事妥速審判法第五、七、八、九條之評析 介紹我國迅速審判權之理論基礎何在，接著簡介第五條羈押次數及期限規定，論述立法過程各方意見，並自現行實定法出發，彙整各界對本法利弊得失之探討，必要時輔以立法過程中曾經提出之對案，與外國法制加以比較，並搜尋目前可見之司法院、最高法院判決呈現實務現況，以期明瞭現行規範對我國實務產生之影響，最後試提建議配套措施，以資日後研究、修法參考。 第四、五章分別針對速審權侵害救濟方式、第三審上訴之禁止與限制加以探究，除探討此類手段是否有助於目的之達成外，並試析日後施行實效及後續反應為何，介紹順序及研究範圍復與第五條相同。 第六章：結論：未來之展望 總結上述各章內容，並根據所證立之論點說明本法之制訂及各規範手段是否有助於目的之達成，及試提出對未來我國刑事案件迅速審判之展望。
並列摘要
The issue of the research focus on whether Article 5,7,8,9 of the “The Criminal Speedy Trial Act” can be helpful to achieve the legislative goal. For the purpose of ensuring fair, legitimate and speedy criminal trials so as to protect human rights and the public interest, this Act announced on 19 May 2010. However, some scholars and judicial practice workers criticized above Articles are not appropriate methods to achieve the legislative goal, and other Articles in totally 14 Articles are mere formality. Therefore, the author try to review and survey this Act focusing on Articles 5,7,8,9. Articles 5,7,8,9 have legal effects as follows: Article 5, the accumulated period of detention during the trial shall not exceed eight years; Article 7, if concluding that the accused right to a speedy trial is gravely violated, the court may reduce the sentence at discretion; Article 8 and 9, a case shall not be appealed to the Supreme Court, or the reasons for appeal are limited to 3 conditions, if the court of second instance reaffirms the not guilty judgment. In order to discuss this issue of the research, the regulations about speedy trial in the United States, Japan and European Court of Human Rights would be simply introduced. Besides, the author analyzed judgments of the Supreme Court and the criticisms related to above Articles. Finally, the author thought Article 5,7,8,9 of the “The Criminal Speedy Trial Act” would be good for the criminal defendant’s speedy trial rights, but thorough settlement means to achieve the legislative goal should be rebuild the structure of the appeals.