從兒童性侵害案件看兒童性同意權與證述能力

Understanding Children Sexual Consent and Testimony

民國99年引發白玫瑰運動的兩起兒童遭性侵害案件，案件中之被害兒童過於年幼，法官以「客觀上難以證明有違反其意願之方法」等理由，難以認定性侵加害人為強制性交罪，後以「與未滿14歲之男女為性交」定罪，導致社會大眾的批判，最高法院即以99年第7次刑庭決議來解決紛爭，但此決議並未根本探討兩案件中，兒童性自主權、性同意權與證述能力問題。本文透過訪談兩位法官、兩位臨床心理師及一位精神科醫師，希望從實務界、跨領域的角度，討論兒童是否能行使自身性自主同意權之判斷依據、兒童證人證詞及專家學者鑑定對於法院認定兒童性同意權的影響因素。研究發現，多數受訪者認為國家需限制兒童性自主權，但在兒童性侵害案件中，最難以證實是否違反其意願；且兒童證言可信度難以判斷之下，法院定罪仍多仰賴頗有侷限性的生物跡證。另一方面，專家證人之鑑定報告，僅為法官參考佐證。在目前研究與實務困境無法解決下，年齡似乎是認定兒童強制性交罪較為客觀無爭議的基準線。根據研究發現，本文建議未來對於兒童性侵害案件，被害人未滿十二歲者，適用刑法第222條，已滿十二歲至未滿十四歲者，法院實施強制專家鑑定，以判定其性行為同意權。此外，法院應該致力提高兒童證詞偵訊技巧並建立專家鑑定制度。

Two cases of child sexual assault that triggered White rose movement in 2010, child victims were too young and it was hard to prove their sexual consent, the judges ruled that 'no objective and subject evidence indicated the sexual conduct was against the child's will' and convicted offenders based on Criminal Code 227, instead of 222. Due to the criticism from the public, the Supreme Court called for the 7th criminal divisions meeting in 2010 to solve the disputes. This paper interviewed 2 judges, 2 clinical psychologists and a psychiatrist and intended to understand how to determine children sexual consent and improve their witness credibility and reliability. The paper found that most of interviewees agree that the State should restrict children sexual behavior, however, based on the current legistration, the courts need to prove victim's content as a main criteria to convict the offense. In child sexual assault cases, one of the most difficult part in the trials is to determine the child's consent. Courts usually prioritize the forensic evidence first and ambiguous about the creditability and reliability of children's testimony. Furthermore, expert reports are used as a referenece without any legal binding. This paper suggests a revision of legal sexual consent age. Children under 12 should be seen as no sexual consent liability, and age between 12-14 should be subject to psychiatric compulsory evaluation on their ability to consent their sexual conduct. Further, courts could improve their techniques of interviewing child victims and establish an expert evaluation system.