兒童妨害性自主案件中司法詢問員之定位 —兼論我國引進兒童倡議中心之可能性

The Legal Status of Forensic Interviewer in Offenses Against Sexual Autonomy Cases of Children—With Discussions of the Possibility of Introducing the Child Advocacy Center

闕士超(Shih-Chao Chueh)

指導教授 ： 金孟華

國立交通大學/科技法律學院/科技法律研究所/碩士(2018年)

摘要

在兒童性侵害案件中，由於其案件性質隱密，故被害人之證詞為最關鍵之證據。另因兒童於心理學上認知、記憶及語言發展之限制，故無法以一般詢訊問方法取得正確且完整之證詞，從而使得檢察官無法舉證證明被告有罪，或可能因錯誤證詞而使冤案發生。傳統上，不論我國或是美國法上均透過傳聞例外、對質詰問權之緩和與審判保護措施回應兒童性侵害案件之困難點。然而，兒童從事發至審判中間可能因為記憶之喪失或外在環境之汙染使傳統訴訟工具失靈。為改善此狀況，美國法上即有司法詢問員與整合性團隊兩種新工具之使用，讓事發後即透過專業且資源整合之方式取得完整且正確之證詞。我國在過去10年亦有許多縣市設立一站式服務，且於106年1月1日施行之性侵害犯罪防治法第15-1條中亦開始設立詢訊問之專業人員。然而，本文認為我國實務上在使用新工具時有若干缺失，本文將從美國法對於上開兩項制度之實踐檢討我國於實務上之缺失並提出修法方向，並進一步探究我國是否能引進類似美國兒童倡議中心之制度。

關鍵字

司法詢問員 ； 整合性團隊 ； 兒童倡議中心 ； 兒童性侵害 ； 性侵害犯罪防治法

並列摘要

In cases of offenses against sexual autonomy of children, because of its secrecy in nature, the victim’s testimony is the most crucial evidence of all. In addition, because of the limited ability of children’s cognition, memory and language development, it is hard to obtain testimony that is both correct and complete from them, thereby decreases the conviction rate. In some cases, it might lead to wrongful conviction because of false testimony. Traditionally, to respond to the aforementioned pain point, both Taiwan and the United States apply traditional procedural tools including hearsay exception, the deviation from strict confrontation requirements and protection measures in trial proceedings. However, the traditional procedural tools might fail owing to children’s memory loss or the contamination from other people. To improve this situation, the United States introduced two new procedural tools—forensic interviewer and the multidisciplinary team. In Taiwan, many one-stop services have been set up in the past 10 years, and Article 15-1 of the Sexual Assault Prevention Act has gone into effect on January 1st, 2017. Nonetheless, this thesis suggests that there are certain flaws in applying the new procedural tools in Taiwan. This thesis will present the flaws in applying the two new procedural tools in Taiwan and propose solutions to the flaws by introducing the practice of applying the new procedural tools in the United States. We will also discuss whether it is possible to introduce Child Advocacy Center that is similar to that in the United States.

並列關鍵字

Forensic Interviewer ； Multidisciplinary Team ； Child Advocacy Center (CAC) ； Child Rape ； Sexual Assault Prevention Act

參考文獻

中文文獻

一、中文書籍

1.王兆鵬，《刑事訴訟講義》，五版，元照出版，臺北（2010）。

2.內政部家庭暴力及性侵害防治委員會，《兒童、智能障礙者性侵害案件偵訊輔助器材使用手冊》，臺北（2003）。

二、中文期刊與專書論文