刑事上訴第三審採「嚴格法律審兼採上訴許可制」的疑慮──以司法院草案為中心

Concerns of Adopting “Strict Trial of Law With The Permission to Appeal” for Appealing to the Criminal Court of the Third Instance: Focusing on the Judicial Yuan's Draft Bill

在建立金字塔型之審級構造的框架下，司法院刑事訴訟制度之第三審設計為「嚴格法律審兼採上訴許可制」，但此一設計是否符合憲法訴訟權保障之核心內容？本文以國際人權公約出發，並介紹德國聯邦憲法法院、歐洲人權法院以及我國司法院相關釋字對此問題之見解以及法律修正後，歸納「普通法院優先」、「救濟途徑明確」、「至少一次的普通上訴救濟途徑」以及「救濟需及時，避免訴訟遲延」等作為救濟制度之核心，在司法本身亦會造成基本權利侵害的前提下，指出司法院相關設計的違憲疑慮以及運作困難之處，並呼籲各界正視此一問題之嚴重性。

Based on the framework of establishing the pyramidal stages of trials, the criminal court’s third instance designed by the Judicial Yuan adopted the system of “strict trial of law with the permission to appeal” and its consistency with the right of instituting legal proceedings protected under the Constitution is questionable. This article, starting from the International Bill of Human Rights and introduction of relevant interpretations and amendments by the German Constitutional Court, European Court of Human Rights, and Taiwan’s J.Y. Interpretation, concluded that “general court’s priority”, “remedial approach’s clarity”, “opportunity of at least one ordinary appeal” and “timely relief” serve as the corner stones of a remedial system. In addition, on the condition that justice itself may infringe people’s fundamental rights, this article pointed out the unconstitutional concern and operational difficulty involved in Judicial Yuan’s said design and called for public attention to this issue.