我國刑事監護制度的現狀與未來──德國法的觀點

The Current Situation and Future of Criminal Guardianship System in Taiwan-The Point of View of German Law

2019年「台鐵殺警案」顯示出我國刑事監護制度的問 題，依據我國《刑法》第87條：「因第十九條第一項之原因 而不罰者，其情狀足認有再犯或有危害公共安全之虞時，令 入相當處所，施以監護。」同條第3項：「前二項之期間為 五年以下。但執行中認無繼續執行之必要者，法院得免其處 分之執行。」本文除了要強調：「無罪責、無刑罰」以及無 罪推定原則，對於無責任能力不罰，仍須顧及其再犯風險以 及對社會大眾的危害，現行之監護處分僅簡單規定五年之執 行上限，並未有相關配套及合理的考量。德國在刑事監護制 度上，相較於我國，思考上較為細緻，除了兼顧社會安全， 也考量了受監護處分之人權保障。依據德國《刑法》第63條 之監護處分，如有必要，應無限期為之，然而依照刑法第 67e條之規定，應在處分後的每一年加以評估，收容十年 後，每九個月評估，以兼顧受監護人之人權。最後的具體建 議：精神病患合併嚴重犯行，除了需要治療，還要給予法制 教育、生活教育、矯正教育，以利社會復歸。除了戒護人力 仍賴保全人員，專業的醫療處所，需要有能力處理內外科急 症、高階影像醫學設備人力、醫護病比要比照加護病房、健 保以外要有固定足額的專屬預算、法務部與衛福部要共同主 辦，分工合作|流程上，轉銜必須與精神病監、社區強制治 療、社會安全網以及定期保護管束或司法觀護對接。

The ''Taiwan Railway Police Killing Case'' in 2019 showed the problem of Taiwan's criminal guardianship system. According to Article 87 of Taiwan's ''Criminal Law'': ''Those who have not been punished for the reasons of Article 19, Paragraph 1 shall be sufficiently guilty of re-offending or When there is a risk of jeopardizing public safety, order entry into a corresponding place and exercise guardianship.'' Item 3 of the same article: ''The period of the first two items is less than five years. However, if the execution is deemed to be unnecessary, the court may exempt it. Execution of punishment.'' In addition to emphasizing the principles of ''no guilt, no punishment'' and presumption of innocence, this article still has to take into account the risk of recidivism and the harm to the public. The current guardianship punishment is only a simple five-year rule. There is no relevant supporting and reasonable consideration for the execution limit. Compared with my country, Germany's criminal guardianship system is more meticulous in its thinking. In addition to taking into account social security, it also considers the human rights guarantees for punishment by guardianship. The guardianship punishment according to Article 63 of the German Criminal Law, if necessary, shall be taken indefinitely, however, according to the provisions of Article 67E, it shall be evaluated every year after the punishment, and every nine months after ten years of accommodation Evaluation to take into account the human rights of the guardian. The final specific suggestion: Mental patients combined with serious offenses, in addition to the need for treatment, should also be given legal education, life education, correction education to facilitate social reunification. In addition to the guardianship staff still relying on security personnel, professional medical premises need to have the ability to deal with medical and surgical emergencies, high-end imaging medical equipment manpower, medical care than the intensive care unit, health care, and a fixed and sufficient exclusive budget, the Legal Department and The Ministry of Health and Welfare should co-sponsor the division of labor and cooperation| in the process, the transition must be connected with psychiatric supervision, community compulsory treatment, social safety net, and regular protection or judicial protection.