環境刑罰與修復式正義之探討

A Discussion on Environmental Penalty and Restorative Justice

林俊仁(Chun-Jen Lin)

《犯罪學期刊》 8卷1期 (2005/06) Pp. 156-183

https://doi.org/10.29607/ZHWHGX.200506.0005

摘要

我國歷次污染控制法規之修訂，不斷提高與擴大環境污染之刑責與處罰範圍，欲用嚴刑峻法來遏止環境犯罪發生。但在刑罰謙抑、刑罰合理化與社會防衛思想的風潮下，基於反省以剝奪自由為中心的傳統刑罰體系缺陷的基礎，各國在刑事政策方面，紛紛以多元的方式規定犯罪的非刑罰化處理規範，以打破「罪與罰」之間的對稱關係，限縮刑罰的範圍，以達成合理分配司法資源、改善短期自由刑的弊端，以達到有效抗制犯罪之目標。
我國部分環境保護法規係來自美國環境法體制，由美國的環境法歷程中可看出，其朝向多元替代性政策來解決環境問題，單靠刑罰手段的嚇阻效果，已經不能改善環境品質。若能兼顧被害人觀點，配合政策工具的運用，提供違反者的再教育與社會大眾環境法規認知能力，以修復式的正義、賠償式的正義來達到改善、保護環境的目的，相信有助於我國環境品質的提升。
本文之目的在於深入探討各種正義模式，及對於環境犯罪者之犯罪行為如何加以處罰，除現有刑法雙軌制的刑罰種類外，如何再予創制第三元，以補償、修復關係的方式，使環境刑法對犯罪行為之處理及反應更具靈活與彈性，並促使行為人改過遷善，達到犯罪預防之功能及刑罰之目的和效果，且減少國家社會成本之耗損及刑事司法體系資源之浪費，並修復加害者、被害者與社區之關係，促進社會改革。

關鍵字

環境刑罰 ； 正義模式 ； 修復式正義 ； 懲罰式正義 ； 嚇阻效果

並列摘要

In order to prevent environment destroy, the concerned authorities intended to put severe penalties on environment violators by continuously increasing responsibilities and punishment range in amendments of pollution control laws and regulations over years. Under the thought and trend of restrained, reasonable penalties and social security, many countries took diverse criminal policies, decriminalized ways, to replace traditional criminal system centered by liberty deprivation. In order to suppress crimes effectively, to allot judicature resources reasonably, to improve defects of short-term imprisonment, many countries broke the balance relation between crime and penalty and limited the range of penalties.
Parts of our environment-protect law derived from American system. From the progress of American environment-protect law, it has adopted more diverse and substitute policies to resolve environment problems, because deterrent means could not improve the environmental qualities alone. It will help promoting our environment qualities by reeducating violators and enhancing public cognitive abilities of environment laws and regulations, and by applying restorative and compensative justice system to resolve environment problems.
This paper attempted to discuss each justice model and penalties to environment violators deeply. The discussing dimensions included the creation of third track of environment penalties, methods to compensate and restore relation destroyed, more flexible ways to deal with environmental crimes, correction of evil environmental doings and reversion of good deeds, how to prevent environment destroy and strengthen effects of penalties, reducing social cost and lose of criminal justice system, restoring relations between victim, criminal and community, and furthering social innovation.

並列關鍵字

environmental penalty ； justice model ； restorative justice ； punitive justice ； deterrent effect

參考文獻

柯澤東(1988)。環境法論。

陳慈陽(2000)。環境法總論。

曹美慧(2001)。遏止環境違犯機制之探討(碩士論文)。東華大學環境政策研究所。

鄭昆山(1998)。環境刑法之基礎理論。

鄭昆山()。,未出版。