刑事審判中的司法詢問員

Forensic Interviewers at Criminal Trials

二○一五年年底，立法院增訂性侵害犯罪防治法第15條之1，引入原施行於英美的司法詢問制度。立法者希望改善弱勢證人的司法困境值得肯定，但由於條文內容過於簡略籠統，法律上路三年以來，各法院作法不一，也引發不少如何與現行制度嫁接的疑問。本文因此參酌他國規定，認為英格蘭與威爾斯之司法實務所建立的監督者模式，最能兼顧被告詰問權與司法詢問專業對於弱勢證人的協助。它一方面保留當事人親自詰問的權利，另一方面它讓當事人的詰問受到司法詢問員的審前指導與審判中監督。這個制度也給法官針對詰問是否適當的最終裁量權，對於既有的刑事審判體制的衝擊最小。一旦確定了審判中司法詢問員應採取的模式，未來的立法就有能夠參照的對象，也能解決現行實務所累積的各種疑問。

In order to help vulnerable witnesses provide testimonies during the criminal investigations and at trials, in 2015, Taiwanese legislators enacted Article 15-1 in the Sexual Assault Crime Prevention Act to introduce forensic interview. While this new statute has officially recognized the needs of vulnerable witnesses, how forensic interviewers help witness in cross examination at trials is far from clear. There is a call from judges and lawyers for legislators to provide specific rules for the forensic interview at trials. After reviewing four models currently operated in different countries, this Article suggests that Taiwan should adopt the Monitor model from England and Wales. The superiority of the Monitor model is due to its ability to provide the best balance between the right to confront witnesses for criminal defendants and the rights of vulnerable witnesses to give useful testimonies at trials and to be protected from undue embarrassments and confusions. It also retains judges the purview to supervise and control the cross examinations. Once the Monitor model is accepted, relevant English and Welsh laws and regulations will become useful tools for Taiwanese legislators to improve our forensic interview system.