| 英文摘要 |
In response to the development of protection of human rights, Judicial Yuan, Taiwan R.O.C. [hereinafter J.Y.]) Interpretation No. 654 (January 23rd, 2009) changed Taiwan’s criminal proceedings. It held that Article 23 Paragraph 3, and Article 28 of the Detention Act in Taiwan, which provided that when a counsel visits the accused in custody, the visitation shall be under surveillance and audio-recording without considering whether such surveillance complies with the purpose of detention or is necessary in maintaining the order of the detention facility or not, violated the principle of proportionality under Article 23 of the Constitution in Taiwan and was inconsistent with the meaning and purpose to protect the right to litigate under Article 16 of the Constitution, and therefore shall be ineffective. Based on the above-mentioned judicial interpretations and J.Y. Interpretation No. 720 (May 16th, 2014), this article analyzes the right of visitation and correspondence between the defendant attorney and the accused in custody (e.g., the right to counsel of in custody suspects) under the Detention Act and the Code of Criminal Procedure in Taiwan through comparative law perspectives. By exploring problems in practice, this article will provide solutions as future legislative and amending proposals.
|
