從《公政公約》第36號一般性意見談王信福死刑案的爭議與救濟

A Review of Wang Xin-Fu's Death Penalty Case from the Perspective of General Comment 36 of the Human Rights Committee

本文以2018年10月人權事務委員會就《公政公約》第6條生命權發布的第36號一般性意見檢視王信福死刑冤錯案之審理及死刑判決發現，這個案件過去審理過程所發生的訴訟遲延疑慮、重要證據遺失、被告未能與證人詰問、死刑量刑事由漏未審酌及調查，均有違背王信福受《公政公約》公平審判、生命權規定保障等權利，而違反公平審判規定所作出之死刑判決，更屬具恣意性而違反《公政公約》第6條生命權保障規定。此外，王信福死刑案至少存有事實調查不完備、未排除可信性較低之供述證據、無科學性證據佐證等違誤，按一般性意見意旨，為了避免在未排除合理懷疑的情況下確定其罪責的被判刑者受到處決而構成任意剝奪生命，國家必須採取一切可行措施重新審查王信福死刑案，以免王信福遭錯誤執行，並應重新評估審視證據及考慮供述證據的虛假與不可靠等問題。

This paper is mainly based on the General Comment No. 36 (GC 36) of the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) on the right to life in Article 6 of the ICCPR in October 2018 to examine the trial and the death penalty judgment of Wang Xin-Fu's wrongful conviction. It was found that this case had delays in litigation, loss of important evidence, no opportunity for the defendant and witnesses to cross-examine, no consideration of the death penalty reasons and investigation, all of which violated Wang Xin-Fu's fair trial, which is guaranteed by the ICCPR. Violation of the fair trial guarantees provided for in Article 14 of the ICCPR in proceedings resulting in the imposition of the death penalty would render the sentence arbitrary in nature, and in violation of Article 6 of the ICCPR. And according to GC 36, the execution of sentenced persons whose guilt has not been established beyond reasonable doubt also constitutes an arbitrary deprivation of life. Therefore, Taiwan Government must take all feasible measures in order to avoid wrongful convictions in death penalty cases including Wang Xin-Fu's case, to review procedural barriers to reconsideration of convictions and to re-examine past convictions on the basis of new evidence. Taiwan Government should also consider the implications for the evaluation of evidence presented in capital cases of new reliable studies, including studies suggesting the prevalence of false confessions and the unreliability of eyewitness testimony.