解嚴後政治犯司法不法之平復—以「確有（叛亂）實據」不予補償為例

本文關注解嚴後政治犯的平反與賠償工作，討論以下三個問題：相關制度如何形成？現況為何？如何平反、賠償該當現行內亂罪、外患罪的政治受難人？這些問題，必須回到我國轉型正義工作最重要的制度：《戒嚴時期不當叛亂暨匪諜審判案件補償條例》。透過立法院公報、口述歷史、回憶錄等，本文發現《補償條例》中的除外條款，鞏固戒嚴時期反共的意識型態。歸納補償基金會董事會議決議不予補償的八十七件案子，發現符合除外條款而不予補償的案件可分為五個類型：武器、間諜、投共、誣告與其他。其中投共、誣告等行為，不構成內亂罪、外患罪。此外，窮盡釋義學，採取合乎憲法意旨之解釋，限縮除外條款的範圍後，僅有三十四人該當除外條款規定。考量戒嚴時期國家嚴重侵害人民基本權利，該當內亂罪、外患罪之政治犯不因此喪失平反與賠償的機會。以該當內亂罪、外患罪確有實據作為分類標準，喪失補償金作為法律效果，並不合於憲法平等原則要求。由於動員戡亂時期的國家體制並非自由民主憲政秩序，其可非難性遠高於為叛亂行為之個人（組織），故不論當事人主觀是否肯定自由民主憲政秩序，都不減損民主化後的國家，應該賠償政治受難人的義務。司法不法之平復，只是轉型正義工作的其中一種，平反工作，應該區分司法與政治的分界，司法可以處理個人所受到的侵害，但是造成白色恐怖的結構性問題，卻遠非司法可以置喙，目前的功課，是避免再次將政治司法化，將平反陷入法律技術的討論。

關鍵字

轉型正義；白色恐怖；戒嚴時期不當叛亂暨匪諜審判案件補償條例；司法不法

並列摘要

This dissertation examines the practices and procedures of the redress and compensation for political prisoners in the post-martial law era. Three issues are discussed based on the most significant transitional justice practice in Taiwan, the enforcement of “Compensation Act for Wrongful Trials on Charges of Sedition and Espionage during the Martial Law Period”: (1) The formation of transitional justice system. (2) The current situation of redressing political crime. (3) The redress and compensation for political prisoners charged with offenses against the internal and external security of the state. By reviewing the Legislative Yuan gazette, oral history and memoirs, this dissertation argues that the exclusion clauses in the “Compensation Act” consolidate the anti-communist ideology in martial law. Through examination of the 87 cases, of which The Foundation rejected compensation, it is suggested that they can be classified into five different circumstances: (1) possession of weapons (2) espionage activities (3) treason (4) malicious accusation, and (5) others. It is argued that cases involving treason and malicious accusation did not apply for the circumstances prescribed in the exclusion clauses. In addition, there were only 34 cases out of 87 conformed with the circumstances prescribed in the exclusion clauses. Considering state’s serious violation by against fundamental rights during the martial-law period, political prisoners charged with offenses against the internal and external security of the state should not be excluded from the redress and compensation practices and procedures. It is also against the constitutional principle of equality to make ‘offenses against the internal and external security of the state’ as the deciding criteria for compensation. In addition, since the nation was not in a liberal democratic constitutional order during the Period of Mobilization for the Suppression of Communist Rebellion, whether or not the individuals or parties affirm the value of liberal democracy will not release the responsibilities of democratized state to compensate for the political victims. The remediation of judicial unlawfulness is only one of the tasks of transitional justice. Redressing work should distinguish between the boundaries of the judiciary and politics. The judicial system is able to deal with violations at individual level; however, the structural problems that caused the “white terror” are far more than judicial issues. This article suggests that government and the society should prevent the judicialization of politics, as well as limiting the discussion on redress and compensation issues at legal techniques level.