人身自由保障問題之研究－兼論日本與台灣現行法

A study on issues in protection of the personal freedom－and also on the law of Japan and Taiwan.

柯育玫(Yu-Mei Ko)

指導教授 ： 許慶雄

淡江大學/國際研究學院/日本研究所碩士在職專班/碩士(2009年)

https://doi.org/10.6846/TKU.2009.00805

摘要

凡限制人民身體自由，不問是否屬於刑事被告之身分，國家機關依據之程序，須以法律規定，其內容更須實質正當，並符合憲法第二十三條所定之條件。因犯罪追訴以外之原因對人民身體自由所為之拘束，即構成人身自由剝奪，舉凡拘留、收容、安置、留置、管收、均屬憲法第八條拘禁之一種，皆應由獨立審判機關依法定程序予以審查決定，始符合憲法意旨。干預人身自由即時強制措施之法規範，係國家干預人民人身自由之授權依據，自應為符合憲法要求之設計。故本文乃探究干預人身自由之憲法制約，並以之作為檢視相關實定法規定，包括罪刑法定主義、不溯既往原則、比例原則、明確性原則、司法一元制度、禁止雙重危險、令狀主義、提審制度、無罪推定原則、訴訟權、被告對質詰問權、聽證聽審權、辯護權、緘默權、國家賠償。

關鍵字

提審制度 ； 被告對質詰問權 ； 聽證聽審權 ； 緘默權 ； 國家賠償

並列摘要

Personal freedom is one of them. The law may not restrict freedoms stipulated in the Constitution, unless the freedoms are abused, the freedoms of others are infringed, or public order is threatened. Even in these situations, the Constitution permits restrictions on constitutional rights and freedoms only under specific circumstances. This is designed to prevent legislative bodies from enacting laws that exceed the limits established by the Constitution. Restrictions on constitutional freedoms are valid only if contained in legislation necessary to prevent restrictions against the freedom of others, to respond to emergencies, to maintain social order, or to enhance social interest. In any case, arrest, trial, and punishment must be implemented strictly in accordance with proper legal procedures. The law of summary administrative enforcement, which authorizes the State to restrain personal freedom, naturally should be constitutional. Secondly, this thesis is going to discuss a constitutional restraint on personal freedom, and, based on that, examine whether relevant statutes are constitutional. The statutes being targeted include Crime and Punishment by Law, Doctrine of Retraction, the Principle of Proportionality , Principle of Definitude, the system of unitary judicial , double jeopardy protection , Writ doctrine, Habeas Corpus, presumption of innocence, Criminal Procedure, confrontation and examination of the defendant , right to beheard , the right to counsel , right to remain silent , State Compensation.

並列關鍵字

Habeas Corpus ； confrontation and examination of the defendant ； right to be heard ； right to remain silent ； State Compensation

參考文獻

11、「司法院釋字第三八四號解釋」

19、田口守一（2006）『刑事訴訟法』，東京：弘文堂。

15、施茂林（1982）『公共設施與國家賠償責任』，台北：大偉書局。

4、「比例原則違憲審查標準之探討」

8、城仲模（1975）「行政法上國家責任之理論與立法之研究─行政法之理論基礎」『臺大法學論叢』第5卷第1期。(行政院國家科學委員會專案委託研究報告論文)