釋字708後外國人收容法規修法與執行探討

外國人收容制度歷來於外國人之人權議題上備受爭議。我國憲法第8條明定人身自由權之保障；2009年又以通過施行法的方式賦予《公民與政治權利國際公約》及《經濟社會文化權利國際公約》國內法效力，其中《公民與政治權利國際公約》第9條亦規定人身自由保障；司法院大法官釋字第708號更直接闡明，人身自由係基本人權，為人類一切自由、權利之根本，任何人不分國籍均應受保障，為現代法治國家共同之準則。故我國憲法第8條關於人身自由之保障亦應及於外國人，使與本國人同受保障。外國人收容目的係為保全強制驅逐出國之執行，隨著非法滯臺外國人之人數增加，受驅逐出國處分後被收容人數亦相應增加。收容涉及人身自由權之限制，釋字708公布後，外國人收容相關法規因應修法，修法後，渠等人身自由權是否受到應有的保障，以及收容執行情況與變化，係本文研究動機。本文先蒐集收容相關文獻與研究，瞭解人身自由權利、外國人收容、替代收容等內容，及德國及日本收容立法例，再由釋字708引出外國人收容相關法規修法內容，並分析歸納收容新制之實際執行情況。透過檢視收容法規修法內容及收容新制執行情況，提出結論與建議，希望能供相關研究議題參考，並期盼未來在外國人管理上，彰顯人權保障，並將收容視為最後手段。

關鍵字

收容；收容替代；人身自由；釋字708 ；入出國及移民法

並列摘要

It has been always a big issue on human rights of foreign detention policy. Article 8 of the Constitution expressly stipulates, “ Physical freedom shall be guaranteed to the people. “ Act to Implement the ICCPR and the ICESCR has promulgated in 2009, and Article 9, Paragraph 1, of the ICCPR stipulates,” Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person.” According to J.Y.（Judicial Yuan） Interpretations No. 708, ” Physical freedom is a fundamental human right and the foundation of all freedoms and rights of humankind. Protecting physical freedom of each individual, regardless of his nationality, is a common principle upheld by all modern rule-of-law states. Thus, the guarantee of physical freedom under Article 8 of the Constitution extends to foreign nationals, and they shall receive the same protection as domestic nationals.” The puspose of detaining foreigners is to repatriate them. As illegal overdue or overstay foreigners becomes more and more, the number of detaining foreigners has been increasing. Detention is to deprive or restrict a person’s physical freedom. The relevant laws of foreign detention were amended due to J. Y. Interpretation No. 708. With this background, the purpose of this research was to examine that whether the foreign detainees’ inherent human rights are appropriately protected in Taiwan. The research examined the detention amendment and implementation due to J.Y. Interpretation No. 708 after reviewing literature of detention with the view of better understanding the concepts of physical freedom, foreign detention, detention alternatives, detention system of Germany and Japan. In summary, this research provided several conclusions and suggestions from juridical and executive aspects.Hope the future foreign detention can not only take into consideration of administrative management, but also protect the human rights of foreigners, and achieve presumption against detention.