論台灣外國人收容之法制與其問題

Related Problems of Detention Act of Foreigner in Taiwan

「收容」為拘束人身自由，且持續一段時間之公權力措施。有關外國人之人身自由保護，明定在公民與政治權利國際公約第九條之規定。我國於2009 年特別制定人權兩公約之施行法，即依國內法之方式，要求各行政機關之職掌與執行，須遵守保障人權兩公約之規範。同時，大法官第七○八號解釋，認為現行入出國及移民法第三十八條有關外國人收容之規定，未設有被收容人得向法院提出救濟，及延長收容之情形，未經法院核准，此二點均違反憲法第八條之規定，應自解釋之日起，至遲於屆滿兩年之日起，失其效力。因此，未來我國對外國人收容之法制，勢必要在兩年之期限內修法，以符合實際之需要，屆時如何修法值得關注。有關外國人人身自由權之保護，是否如同本國人一致？及現行入出國及移民法第三十八條有關授權得收容外國人之原因事由，其內容為何？與執行強制驅逐出國之「合理作業期間」，是否得不受憲法第八條之拘束？擬在本文中予以探討。

Sheltering is a kind of restriction to individual freedom within a period of time enforced by the public authority. On the other hand, the foreigner’s right of freedom is provided under Article 9 of ICCPR. In 2009, Taiwanese authority has passed the enforcement rules of ICCPR and ICESCR and demand all related administrative agencies to comply and implement rules and regulations contained within those two international human rights treaties. At the same time, the No. 708 Interpretation of Grant Justices regards article 38 of the Immigration Act concerning the shelter of foreigner that does not allow sheltered foreigner to petition through judicial means and the granting extension of sheltering without Court’s permission is in violation of Article 8 of the Constitution. According to same Interpretation, all domestic laws and regulations concerning foreigner’s sheltering shall be revised within two years in order to be in conformity with the real needs. This article will analyze whether the protection of foreigner’s freedom should be equal to that of nationals, what is the exact content promulgated in the article 38 of the Immigration Act, and whether the “reasonable time” of compulsory expulsion escapes the judicial review of Article 8 of the Constitution.