從精神衛生及社會經濟政策省思臺灣無差別殺／傷人事件之防治

Prevention and Governance of Indiscriminate Killing/Harming in Taiwan: A Mental Health and Socioeconomic Policy Perspective

臺灣自三十餘年前開始，無差別殺／傷人事件逐漸引起人們的注意，尤其在最近十餘年，無差別殺／傷人事件在媒體之曝光率比以前更高，「似乎」此類事件之發生率比以前更高，再加上此類事件本身之發生原因及犯案者之動機經常無法為一般人所理解，又與加害人「精神疾病症狀」的不可預測性結合，因此，經常造成人心惶惶。有論者認為，應該要加強管制，以提升人身及社會安全之保障，人權的保障在安全的考量下，必須退讓。本文首先提出無差別殺／傷人的定義，以介紹幾個無差別殺／傷人案件作為引子，探討精神衛生、刑事司法政策與人權的糾葛，並接續介紹秩序治理的五個模型，然後回顧與殺人相關之理論與實證研究的國外文獻，最後在代結論中提出一個多層次跨專業之動態防治政策，強調良好的兼顧人權的社會經濟福利政策或可避免某些潛在的無差別殺人者的出現或無差別殺／傷人事件的發生，然而，因為這些個案的稀少性，降低無差別殺／傷人事件或可稱為良好社會經濟福利政策的附帶作用，但我們難以得知誰是真正被防治的人。

Since 30 more years ago, indiscriminate killing/harming began to draw the attention of people in Taiwan. Especially, in recent one more decades, the media exposure of such events increased. It seemed that the incidence of such events is higher than in the past. In addition, people get very much frightened as the causes and the offenders' motivation are often unknown, especially when combined with the unpredictability of the offenders' psychopathology. Therefore, some scholars argued for strengthening the mechanisms of individual and social protection in which concerns for human rights protection is not the priority. This paper first proposes a definition of indiscriminative killing and explores the intricacies among mental health, criminal justice and human rights protection based on simple introduction of several cases of indiscriminate killing. Then, it used five conceptual models for governance of order in human society. After the literature review of theories and empirical studies on killing, especially stranger killing, the paper finally proposed a multilevel multi-professional dynamic policy model for the prevention of indiscriminative killing. It emphasizes that a good enough social welfare policy with good concerns for human rights may prevent the happening of indiscriminate killers or indiscriminate killings. Due to the rarity of such events, the reduction of the potential incidence of indiscriminate killing could be deemed as a collateral benefit of social welfare policy, but we would not know who or which events benefit from these good enough policy measures.