中國國民黨對政治犯之改造：以山西反省院為例

1927年4月，在由中國國民黨所發動的清黨以後，握持南京國民政府政治權力的國民黨人，在面對去處理其政治敵人——中國共產黨人時，開始推行與過去的殺伐政策迥然有別的改造政策。改造政策的推行，乃是透過國民政府所制定、施行的一系列可使「政治敵人」在身分上，先轉換為「政治犯」，最後再轉換為「普通人民」的法令，來完成其欲從根本上解決與共產黨人爭奪政治權力問題的目的。在這些足使政治犯被接連地製造出來的法令中，尤以1928年10月的《共產黨人自首法》與1929年12月的《反省院條例》至為重要。兩法的規定，可謂正是國民黨在推行改造政策下的重要手段。《共產黨人自首法》中，規定政治敵人經過自首／自新手續，能夠獲得減刑或免刑的法律待遇，而《反省院條例》中，亦規定若干政治犯，必須接受國民黨的所謂「感化教育」。本研究透過探討《共產黨人自首法》與《反省院條例》的施行情況，發掘兩法在統治當局打擊共產黨一事上所收到的效果，一是可從已經過自首／自新手續者，獲取關於共產黨的各項情報，以擴大打擊其組織的核心；二是可使經過「感化教育」者，因為思想、政治等原因，而無法在出院後，輕易地再返回其組織中。山西省的統治當局正是在欲對共產黨人推行改造政策的背景下，即於1928年10月在太原設立山西自新院，而後於1931年8月，該院因為受國民政府司法行政部的管轄，所以改組為山西反省院，最後即於1937年5月結束。從本研究對於山西自新院／反省院事務的考察來看，多數政治犯在出院後的動向，仍然與共產黨有所關連。而且本研究亦在對一位政治犯所發表在《自新》上的文章進行分析後，發現他在文章中所提出的論述，值得商榷處頗多。這是顯見在國民黨所推行的改造政策下，由反省院所施加在政治犯身上的「感化教育」的成效是低落的。為了說明反省院成效低落的原因，本研究即以綜述反省院運作的方式，來討論其面對政治犯思想時的侷限性，以及由其所衍生的任意性與專斷性問題，並且描述「仁愛」一詞，在其「感化教育」中的來源與意義。除此之外，本研究亦通過梳理共產黨對於國民黨、國民政府的「自首」的看法，以顯示反省院對於共產黨人而言，其實存在著一種微弱的政治作用。這種政治作用，會使得若干從反省院離開的忠貞共產黨人，陷入必須去向共產黨組織澄清自己「沒有叛變」、「不是叛徒」，以不致遭其組織定性、定調為「政治敵人」的困境。對於共產黨而言，要解決這種奠基於其對「自首」的變化性解釋，而衍生的問題，則是必須依靠共產黨所發起的歷次尋找黨人的「政治錯誤」的政治運動來解決。本研究因此認為，在區分敵友的意義上，這正是反省院對於共產黨人、國民黨人在他們各自的中國革命道路上的重要影響，而無法受到忽視。

關鍵字

政治敵人；自新；思想改造；《共產黨人自首法》；《反省院條例》

並列摘要

In April 1927, after the Shanghai massacre was perpetrated to target those with ties to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) within the Kuomintang (KMT), people at the power center of the Nanjing Nationalist Government ,which was founded by the KMT, rolled out a policy of appeasement toward their political nemesis, the CCP members, in contrast to thier catch and kill approach in the past. This appeasement approach was implemented by the Nationalist Government to legally position such “political enemies” as “political prisoners” before converting them to “ordinary citizens,” with the purpose of purposely eradicating any political edge previously held by the communist-sympathizing KMT members, in the struggle for political power. Among the regulations that industriously churned out political prisoners, “The Communist Surrendering Act” and “The Reformatory Act,” introduced in October 1928 and December 1929, respectively, were the hallmarks of the said politically appeasement disposition by the KMT. “The Communist Surrendering Act“ , stipulated that a political enemy can receive commutation or immunity once they are subject to surrender or self-renewal procedures. Furthermore, “The Reformatory Act” stipulated that a political prisoner must be subjected to “Reform Education” by the KMT. This research explores the effects garneredby the implementation of “The Communist Surrendering Act” and “The Reformatory Act,” by the ruling authority in giving a blow to the CCP.” First, it was accomplished through surrender or self-renewal procedures to acquire varied intelligence from the CCP in an expanded effort to strike at the heart of the CCP’s organization. Second, it became difficult for those who were subjected to “Reform Education”, to return to the CCP for ideological and political reasons. The ruling authority of Shanxi Province founded the Shanxi Self-Renewal Camp in Taiyuan in October 1928, under the premise of implementing the appeasement policy toward the CCP members. In August 1931, as the Shanxi Self-Renewal Camp came under the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Judicial Administration of the Nationalist Government, it was re-organized as Shanxi Reformatory which was closed in May 1937. This research examines the affairs of the Shanxi Self-Renewal Camp or the Reformatory, whereby most political prisoners maintained their ties with the CCP after being discharged from the Shanxi institution. Furthermore, by analyzing the article published in “Self-Renewal Monthly” by one of the political prisoners, it was found that the contention he raised in the article was debate-worthy. It is apparent that the effect of “Reform Education” on the political prisoners in the Reformatory, under the appeasement policy by the KMT, was inconsequential. To articulate the reason for the failure of the Reformatory, this study summarizes the Reformatory’s mode of operation to discuss its limitations in dealing with the ideology of the political prisoners and the derived random and arbitrary issues while describing the origin and meaning of the word, “kindness,” amid the “Reform Education” in the Reformatory. Furthermore, this study also combs through the sentiment of the CCP towards the “Surrender” procedure by the KMT and Nanjing Nationalist Government to strategically manifest a subtle political effect of the Reformatory on the CCP members. This political effect would orient the loyal CCP members discharged from the Reformatory, toward the CCP to prove that their loyalty to the CCP was “Not Compromised,” and that they should not be regarded as the CCP’s“political enemy.” As far as the CCP was concerned, to resolve the issues derived from the varying explanation of “Surrender,” it must have been subject to the political movement in excavating the “political mistake” of its members. Hence, this study argues that to differentiate between friends and foes, was indefatigably a important influence of the Reformatory on the members of the CCP and the KMT on their respective paths in the Chinese Revolution.