警察執行攔查交通工具適法性之探討

Legality of Enforcement of Traffic Stop by the Police

本文利用文獻探討及次級資料分析，主要探討警察執行交通工具攔查之適法性，以德日美及我國警察交通工具攔查規範分析。各國為維護人民行動自由權，在交通工具攔查之職權行使上，均限制在合理懷疑之情況下實施，將其區分個別攔查與集體攔查，前者屬非計畫性勤務，對於已發生危害或依客觀合理判斷易生危害之交通工具，由執勤之警察依現狀加以判斷；後者屬計畫性勤務，依警察職權行使法規定行經指定路段而設置之管制站，以及道路交通管理處罰條例規定設有告示執行酒測之處所，應由地區警察分局長或其相關職務以上長官指定方屬合法。於非計畫性勤務中，警察認已發生危害或有蛇行、猛然煞車、車速異常等客觀合理判斷為易生危害之交通工具，則屬警察職權行使法交通工具攔查之範圍；若單純一般非發生危害或非易生危害之交通違規行為，僅係屬道路交通管理處罰條例、道路交通安全規則以及「違反道路交通管理事件統一裁罰基準及處理細則」之範疇。在交通工具攔查之法規適用判斷上，本文認為應以「交通工具外觀」為法律適用之基準，並提出將攔查之職權修法納入道路交通管理處罰條例第7 條予以明確化、將現行職權舉發列入警察作業程序以及強化執行交通工具攔查作業程序之教育訓練等三項建議，供實務參考。

This paper aims at exploring the legality of traffic stop of transportation vehicles enforced by the police as well as the restrictions on police authority for traffic stop in terms of protecting people’s right to freedom of movement in Germany, Japan, the USA and Taiwan. In this paper, the discussion is divided into individual traffic stop and team traffic stop operations. The former is categorized as non-planning police operation. Depending on existing situations, a police officer determines whether a transportation vehicle is already in jeopardy or prone to cause possible danger based on objective judgments. On the other hand, the latter is a type of planned police operation. According to the Police Power Exercise Act, the police set up check stops at designated locations on the roads. In addition, the police follow the details prescribed in the Road Traffic Management and Penalty Act to signal a stop for conducting an alcohol breath test. Legal alcohol breath tests should be designated by Chief of a district precinct or a higher position in charge of this operation. However, during a non-planning operation, it is considered as traffic stop prescribed in the Police Power Exercise Act if a police officer finds objective and reasonable facts showing that a vehicle is already in danger, posing threat to others, zigzagging, sharply braking or driving at abnormal speeds. Traffic violations which are not dangerous or prone to cause danger and harm are simply considered as violations against the Road Traffic Management and Penalty Act and the Road Traffic Safety Regulations; and these violations are processed in compliance with the Uniform Punishment Standards for Handling the Matters of Violating Road Traffic Regulations. Therefore, in terms of the laws and regulations applicable to traffic stop, the author argues that“the appearance of transportation vehicles” can serve as a standard to determine the laws and regulations that are applicable. Based on the above statement, three suggestions are made as follows: the police authority over traffic stop should be explicitly incorporated into Article 7 of the Road Traffic Management and Penalty Act; the existing police power to report should be listed in the police operation procedures; and the operation procedures of traffic stop should be strengthened in order to ensure police dignity during law enforcement. The above-mentioned is expected to serve as a reference for police practice.