英文摘要 |
After the 2014 judgment in the case of Datong Company‘s mixed oil, which provoked controversy, the Legislature amended Article 49-1 of the Act Governing Food Safety and Sanitation (AGFSS) immediately, the confiscation of crime proceeds now extend its force to cover the third party’s property. The amendment also includes procedural safeguards for the third party (such as the consumer), and authorized the Executive Yuan to formulate rules for evaluating the crime proceeds. Article 49-1 assembled both substantive and procedural law of the confiscation of crime proceeds, which can be described as a microcosm of the current forfeiture system, it is worth to make a comprehensive review of legislation. This study submit the following suggestion to the current legislation: first, legislators shall define the element of a third party when confiscating crime proceeds. Second, adopt the principle of net amount directly. Third, transform requisition and compensation of crime proceeds into supplementary sequestration. Fourth, delete penalty provisions. Fifth, enhance the completeness of procedural and material elements of forfeiture. Sixth, granting rights to the third party, whose property was been sequestrated, to participate in the proceedings. Seventh, authorize the judge to evaluate the amount and the range of the crime proceeds. Eighth, construct the distribution procedure for criminal victim to participate in the implementation stage. Overall, the existing legal norms have serious structural defects, a full-scale reform of confiscating crime proceeds is an imminent issue of criminal policy. |