英文摘要 |
Recently during party alternation in Taiwan, a great disturbance rose abruptly on the matter that Taiwanese nationals suspected on fraud cases far from Kenya were repeatedly deported to mainland China; and then successively, Taiwanese suspects were deported from Malaysia and Cambodia to mainland China, making people wonder about what the truth of relevant cases is? Whether Taiwanese judicial sovereignty has been impinged upon? Whether cross-strait agreements are applicable to the crimes committed in third countries by the people of cross-straits? Whether negotiations have ever concluded that Taiwanese nationals, as suspects investigated and seized in third countries for fraud cases, should comply with the principle that 'criminal suspects be taken back to their origins'? Or such principle is consistent with the international law with respect to the legal theory of jurisdiction or to the regulations on penal spatial effectiveness? These are the subjects worth thinking deeply about. Eventually, this paper will review the negotiations for jurisdiction with third countries or with China, and the key points involved in these negotiations after confirming the jurisdiction, such that viewpoints on criminal policy may be presented in striving for repatriation and hearing in Taiwanese courts for the Taiwanese nationals suspected on the telecoms fraud cases, in an attempt to invite more valuable remarks and to welcome for anyone's references. |