2012年刑事程序法發展回顧：從國際人權公約內國法化的觀點出發

Developments in the Law in 2012: Criminal Procedure Law

本文從國際人權法內國法化的觀點出發，關切國際人權法與我國刑事訴訟法的接軌問題，因此從2012年最高法院刑事裁判中，選擇具國際人權法關連性的幾則裁判作為評釋對象，藉此回顧我國去年度刑事程序法的發展概況。
探討最高法院刑事訴訟的相關裁判，除了刑事訴訟法作為法源之外，據公民與政治權利國際公約（簡稱公政公約）及經濟社會文化權利國際公約施行法第2、3條規範可知，解釋我國法應參考兩公約人權規定、立法意旨及相關解釋。而關於公政公約最為基本以及最為權威的解釋，便是人權事務委員會作成的一般性意見書。職是，本文以與刑事訴訟關聯最為直接的公政公約第7條、第14條的規定及其一般性意見書作為準繩，檢視我國刑事裁判。
除此之外，二次戰後國際人權法的發展具有相互參照之特性，國際人權機構相互援引見解，甚至於作為實質法源，乃是常態。公政公約制定時曾參考當時已生效的歐洲人權公約之體例和內容；人權事務委員會陸續作成的一般性意見書，亦時有援用歐洲人權法院的案例法。歐洲人權法院對歐洲人權公約第3條及第6條的相關闡釋，諸如國家對於酷刑指摘的各種積極義務、無偏頗性要求的主、客觀檢驗基準及合理期間的幾項審查基準，皆是兩者保障內容雷同或競合之事例，因此本文亦以之作為分析評釋之材料。
據此，本文挑選刑訊禁止與繼續效力、法官無偏頗性與聲請迴避以及合理審判期間與減刑優惠等三個議題，以公約內國法化之觀點及最高法院裁判走向為基礎，依序歸納相關最高法院裁判要旨，並闡釋其與國際人權公約之關連性，最後評釋裁判。

The primary purposes of this article are to emphasize the domestic legal adjustifications toward international human rights treaties. In order to clearly demonstrate its developments, a numbers of Supreme Court criminal judgments regarding to fundamental human rights were taken as study sources.
In addition to criminal procedure law, according to Article 2, 3 of Act to Implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) which ratified in 2009, the provisions of two Covenants should also be applied by judicial branches. And the general comments published by Human Rights Committee that interprets the scope and meaning of the provisions of ICCPR forms one of the most important guidelines for the understanding of the Covenant. Therefore, this article pays attention to the statutes of ICCPR which closely related to criminal procedures and the general comments thereof so as to examine the judicial practice on its implementations.
Based on above, the article, aiming at examining domesticalization of international human rights instruments, focuses on three topics: 1. Prohibition against torture and the continuing effect of forced confession. 2. The impartiality of tribunal and the disqualification of judges. 3. Reasonable trial period and the commutation of sentence. Each of the three topics will be analyzed in the light of its theoretical and practical aspect and finishes with a separate conclusion.