刑事拒證特權之研究--以職業關係為中心

A Study on the Professional Privilege in Criminal Procedure

許家源(Chia-Yuan Hsu)

指導教授 ： 陳運財 ； 陳春生

國立臺北大學/法律學院/法律學系/博士(2013年)

摘要

現代化之刑事訴訟法具有多元化功能，除了傳統上所謂發現真實、保障人權外，也同時負有實現、維護其他公共利益之任務。因此，對於從事特定職業之人擔任證人時，其業務上應保密之事項，在訴訟法上遂賦予「拒證特權」，以維護社會對於其業務之信賴。雖然我國刑事訴訟法（下稱我國法）第182條對於律師、醫師等職業設有拒證特權制度，但相較於歐美、日本之法制，不僅要件過於簡化，裁判趨於保守，學術研究及修法議案也乏人問津，儼然形成一大缺漏，實有改革之必要。
在上述動機下，本文首先呈現我國問題所在，隨後採取比較、分析之研究方法，以美國、日本之文獻、法制為主，探尋其法理基礎，並探討其在我國法律體系定位上之正當性基礎。其次，以最具代表性之三種職業—律師、醫師、新聞記者為對象，分析其法律要件、法律效果以及例外類型，藉此呈現制度之應然面。
本文之目的既然在於重整我國制度，故最後以上開之論述為基礎，提出我國法律制度增修建議，包括拒證特權本體及其配套措施，以具體條文提供國內未來立法及運作之參考。

關鍵字

拒證特權 ； 拒絕證言權 ； 業務關係之拒絕證言權 ； 刑事訴訟法第182條

並列摘要

The modern criminal procedure code has its own multiple functions nowadays. Besides truth finding and human rights protection, the so-called traditional functions, it has also been assigned the mission to accomplish and defend other public interests. Therefore, to protect the trust that our society has long left in certain professions, those who devotes to the certain careers, the code has privileged them the “testimonial privileges/ evidentiary privileges” when they become witnesses. On contrary to the regulations of mainstream western countries and Japan, though we have the similar regulations for witnesses such as doctors and lawyers in the criminal procedure code, not only the factors of those rules are still primitive, meanwhile the courts maintain a conservative interpretation, the lacks of academic researches and amendment projects has also induced the essential omission of this system which is indeed to be reformed.
Thus the essay will first present the problems we have here under the current rules. By comparing and analyzing the similar systems in other countries like the United States and Japan, and based on the jurisprudential foundations of the privilege, it’ll indicate the legitimacy of this privilege in our legal system. Secondly, by analyzing the factors, legal effects and the exceptions of the rules, targeting on the most typically three careers involved into the testimonial privileges – lawyers, doctors and journalists, the substance of the system will hence emerge.
Since the object of this essay is to reform the system of the testimonial privileges, it’ll propose the concrete amendment suggestions, including the testimonial privileges and its supporting rules, based on the discourse above in conclusion as the reference for the future legislative amendment and the practices of the privileges.

並列關鍵字

testimonial privileges ； attorney-client privilege ； physician-patient privilege ； work-product doctrine

參考文獻

(1) 王瑜玲，「論新聞從業人員之拒絕證言權」，台大法律研究所碩士論文，2006年7月

(3) 范立達，「記者拒絕證言權之研究」，台大政治研究所碩士論文，2007年7月，

(13)林鈺雄，「刑事訴訟法（上）」，元照，2010年8月六版。

(8)李榮耕，「拒絕證言告知義務之違反及其法律效果--簡評最高法院九八年度臺上字第五九五二號判決」，臺灣法學雜誌，第153期，2010年6月。

(25) 簡銘昱，「論民事訴訟法上拒絕證言權之告知義務—兼評最高法院89年度臺上字第2091號民事判決」，東吳法研論集，第2期，2006年4月。