美國聯邦刑事域外管轄的發展與省思――以海外反貪腐法為例

Extraterritorial Jurisdiction in the U.S. Federal Criminal Law-FCPA and Its Enforcement

鑑於美國在全球供應鏈的關鍵角色和美元在貨幣市場的主導地位，美國聯邦刑事域外管轄已成為企業經營活動中必須熟悉的運行規則，而美國海外反貪腐法（FCPA）正是美國基於經濟霸權地位所制定的經貿規則，並以此打擊競爭對手取得優勢地位。在過去十年間，由於聯邦檢察官擁有廣大的裁量權，再加上FCPA廣泛適用範圍與擴張解釋，並施以高額和解金與嚴厲處罰，使得美國司法部在FCPA執法活動上保持高度侵略性，而有侵害國家主權的疑慮，此凸顯出反貪腐有效追訴與尊重國家主權間難以衡平之困境。
本文首先將簡要概述刑事域外管轄在國際法及國際反貪腐公約的規範，接著說明美國聯邦刑事域外管轄在美國憲法設有結構性及正當程序條款限制以及對外關係法有合理原則及限縮解釋規則的適用，且上述限制並未阻礙美國聯邦刑事域外管轄持續擴張，再透過起訴書分析美國司法部起訴書如何擴張解釋FCPA要件延伸管轄範圍，進而推導出美國政府FCPA域外管轄行使已悖離聯合國反貪腐公約意旨――不干涉原則。最後，建議FCPA域外管轄行使應以合理原則為依歸，以衡平有效追訴貪腐及維護國家主權之價值。希冀我國企業能正視跨境法制落差，建置完善的法令遵循機制，以有效掌握並迴避可能的法律風險。

Given the U.S. crucial role in global supply chain and the dominance of the US dollar in currency market, extraterritorial jurisdiction in the US federal criminal law has become the rules of global trade and investment that enterprises should know in business activities. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) itself is as a product based primarily on the U.S. economic hegemony, which empowers the United States to create a competitive edge to beat the competition. Over the past ten years, the DOJ has remained highly aggressive in FCPA enforcement actions as a result of the prosecutor's broad discretion, the broad application of FCPA and large settlement amounts, whereby the United States may constitute serious infringement of national sovereignty. It also reflects the difficult balance between effective prosecution of corruption and respect for the principles of national sovereignty.
The article will first briefly introduce criminal extraterritorial jurisdiction in international law and international anti-corruption multilateral treaty. Next, the article will address the limitation on the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction used by U.S. courts which includes constitutional limits such as structural and due process limits and the principle of reasonableness of the Restatement Third of the Foreign Relations Law and other principles of interpretations of the Restatement Fourth of Foreign Relations Law. Still, the courts have tended to expand the extraterritorial application of U.S. criminal law. The article will conduct a case-by-case analysis to see how the DOJ expands the jurisdictional reach of the FCPA over foreign defendants and then further infer that the DOJ's aggressive assertion of extraterritorial FCPA jurisdiction has a serious deviation from the spirit of the United Nations Convention against Corruption―the principle of non-intervention. Finally, the article suggests that the exercise of extraterritorial FCPA jurisdiction must comply with the principles of reasonableness in order to strike the balance between effective prosecution of corruption and respect for the principles of national sovereignty; meanwhile, the Taiwanese enterprises shall recognize the differences in respect of regulatory frameworks and the role of prosecutors and establish an effective FCPA compliance program to manage potential legal risks to avoid FCPA violations.