近10年犯罪狀況及其分析──108年刑事修法與政策觀察

Crime Situations and Analyses in Recent 10 Years- Changes in Criminal Jurisprudence and Policies in 2019

分析官方犯罪統計數據趨勢，是犯罪研究的重要環節，以「犯罪狀況及其分析」官方專書為例，犯罪數據含括對犯罪者的調查、偵查、審理、執行、矯正、復歸等，但由於此類統計數據製作目的未必本於犯罪研究，且缺乏議題間的因果關係連結，倘若僅進行多類犯罪統計數據的趨勢描述與分析，容易侷限於對既定政策的觀察與技術性建議，因此，如能掌握官方統計數據，擁有較完整呈現某種現況的優勢，規劃犯罪研究主題，並在有數據佐證的疑義論述中，評析當前犯罪防治或刑事政策的問題與精進建議，則更能提升官方統計資料分析之效果。基此，本文以特定議題在近年制度、政策變革中的重要程度為核心，擇取108年刑事修法中的毒品犯罪──製販運輸毒品罪與施用毒品行為戒治、108年普通刑法提高法定刑修法，及108年監獄行刑法修法之假釋審核機制等重點，透過近10年犯罪數據分析，佐證制度與政策忽略的實務爭議，提出精進方向如下：對於製販運輸毒品罪，應謹慎評估加重法定刑責後的效益，並探討實務上不起訴率提高與多數科刑未達法定刑度的成因；對於施用毒品行為戒治，應檢視行政處遇先行之執行成效不彰原因，與檢視附命戒癮治療緩起訴處分、勒戒處所與戒治所的醫療資源不足問題，以因應修法後增加的機構內外戒癮治療執行人數；對於普通刑法提高法定刑修法，應正視特定犯罪類別起訴率下降、不起訴率與緩起訴率上升的現象與成因，及修法後可能增加監禁人口，加劇監獄高齡化的問題與處遇；對於假釋審核基準法制化，應留意過去以社會防衛為導向的政策，造成108年修法後的受刑人社會復歸導向受到影響的可能性，並加強運用以受刑人意願為本的陳述意見制度，與斟酌再犯預測量表之使用。

Analyzing trends in national crime statistics is an integral part of criminological research. The official publication“Crime Situations and Analyses”comprises crime data across stages of detection, investigation, trial, execution of court rulings, correction, reintegration and rehabilitation. However, the purpose of collecting such crime data does not necessarily serve for criminological research and there is a lack of correlation between the issues in question. Simply relying on descriptions and analysis of various types of crime statistics, analytical results can be limited to observation and technical suggestions on existing policies. In sum, comprehensive official statistical data that captures detailed information on the status quo allows researchers to determine suitable research topics in connection with criminology. In addition, it is important to refer to evidence-based data to analyze current issues on crime prevention and the criminal policy, and propose recommendations for future improvement to enhance the application of statistical analysis published by authorities. In this context, based on the level of importance of specific issues in respect of recent major changes in criminal jurisprudence and relevant policies, this paper selects the following issues for further analysis: 1) drug offense provisions (offenses of manufacturing, transporting and selling narcotics; rehabilitation of convicted offenders of drug use) in the 2019 amendments of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act; 2) increasing the severity of punishment in the 2019 amendments of the Criminal Code, and 3) provisions regarding parole assessment criteria in the 2019 amendments of the Prison Act. Through analyzing crime data over the past ten years and looking into practical issues that have been overlooked in criminal jurisprudence and policies, recommendations for future improvements proposed by the paper are as follows: 1) With regard to offenses of manufacturing, transporting and selling narcotics, the effectiveness of extending their mandatory sentences requires a careful assessment. Moreover, it is necessary to identify potential reasons for an increase in rates of non-prosecution and why most convicted offenders receive sentences that are generally shorter than the mandatory sentence. 2) With regard to rehabilitation of convicted offenders of drug use, it is crucial to review reasons that lead to poor performance of administrative treatments. In addition, it is important to examine the scarcity of medical resource at drug abstention and rehabilitation centers and drug abuser treatment centers, and for offenders who receive deferred prosecution decisions with attached conditions on completion of drug addiction treatment. This can assist to seek solutions to deal with the increasing number of drug users who are ruled to receive institutional and non-institutional treatment after the 2019 amendments of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act came into effect. 3) With regard to increasing the severity of punishment in the 2019 amendments of the Criminal Code, several aspects need to be addressed, which include declines in prosecution rates of certain crimes, increases in rates of non-prosecution and deferred prosecutions and reasons behind these trends. The 2019 amendments may have also resulted in an increase in the number of prisoners and intensified challenges and problems associated with an aging population in prison. 4) With regard to the introduction of parole assessment criteria in the Prison Act, parole assessment criteria should be mindful whether previous policies with a focus of social safeguard may impact on the effectiveness of the 2019 amendments that have switched to a regime in support of prisoners returning to society. Reinforcing a system that allows prisoners to have opportunities to be heard and rethinking the use of scales to predict re-offenses should also be considered.