政治轉型後人民因不當刑事判決遭沒收財產返還之研究──以國際間發展為比較

A study on the return of confiscation of property by unlawful sentences after political transformation: a comparison of international development

政府為彌平錯誤，撫平歷史傷痛，於上個世紀90年代中期，相繼通過「戒嚴時期人民受損權利回復條例」、「戒嚴時期不當叛亂暨匪諜審判案件補償條例」，因叛亂暨匪諜審判案件受有不當審判，而於解嚴後不能獲得補償或救濟之受裁判者，加以補償。不過國安法第9條之規定，封鎖了戒嚴法第10條之適用，而使得權利受損人民無法上訴，並取得無罪確定判決，進而使得戒嚴時期人民受損權利回復條例第4條「戒嚴時期人民因內亂、外患罪被沒收財產者，於受無罪判決確定後，得請求返還；如不能返還，應以適當金錢補償之。」之規定形同具文。促進轉型正義條例施行之日起，戒嚴時期不當叛亂暨匪諜審判案件補償條例所涉及之政治案件受難者，其原本所受之判決依規定即於當日起自動撤銷。判決撤銷，原有之主刑遭撤銷，則沒收財產之從刑即失其附麗，即應返還予被害人或原所有人。世界其他國家亦曾發生過與我國類似之情形，在相關之立法例中，也有頗值我國作為解決此種返還財產難題之借鏡者。本文擬就有類似「轉型正義」經驗之國家中，擇其中具有代表性者，特別是與我國有相同，有歷經威權、軍事統治過程國家的立法例，以比較法之角度觀察及簡要地予以介紹、探究，或可做為具體實踐之參考。 In order to calm down the mistakes and heal the pain of history, the government successively passed the 'Regulations on the Rights of Peoples with Damages during the Martial Law Period' and the 'Regulations on Compensation for Improper Insurrection and Spyness Cases during the Severe Suppression Period' due to the rebellion. The case of the sui and sui sui trials was improperly tried, and the judges who were unable to obtain compensation or relief after the martial law were compensated. However, the provisions of Article 9 of the National Security Law have blocked the application of Article 10 of the martial law, so that the people whose rights have been impaired cannot appeal, and they have obtained the acquittal to determine the judgment, and thus the people's rights to damage during the martial law period. If the people are confiscated for property due to civil unrest or external crimes, they may request a refund after being acquitted; if they cannot be returned, they shall be compensated with appropriate money.' From the date of implementation of the Regulations on the Promotion of Transitional Justice, the victims of political cases involved in the Regulations on Compensation for Inappropriate Insurgency and Spy Spy Judicial Cases during the martial law period shall be automatically revoked on the same day as the ruling. If the judgment is revoked and the original principal sentence is revoked, the confiscation of the property will result in the loss of its affiliation, that is, it should be returned to the victim or the original owner. Other countries in the world have also experienced similar situations with our country. Among the relevant legislative cases, there are also considerable value for China as a solution to solve this problem of returning property. This paper intends to have a representative of the 'transformation justice' experience, especially those who are similar to China, have legislative cases in countries with authoritarian and military rule, and observe and briefly compare them from the perspective of comparative law. Introduce, explore, or serve as a reference for specific practices.