受刑人秘密通訊與表現自由之違憲探究與修法芻議──美國判例法之借鏡

Exploring the Violation of Constitutional Protections on Inmates'Confidential Correspondence and Freedom of Expression: Legal Implications from American Case Law

2017年12月份司法院大法官會議針對受刑人出版書籍的表現自由與發受書信的秘密通訊，作出司法院釋字第756號解釋，宣告部分監獄法規對於限制受刑人之上述權利部分，構成違憲，衝擊監獄法制與實務甚深。基此，本文首先檢視司法院釋字第756號解釋之事實背景、違憲內容與重要性，並對於當前矯正實務的衝擊，進行分析。其次，透過比較法的方式，參考美國聯邦及各級法院對於受刑人在言論與表現自由權利的違憲審查基準，以及相關判例所衍生之規定，進行介紹、綜整與歸納，期能釐清美國法院對於監獄當局於限制或干預受刑人有關上述權利之原則。最後，將司法院釋字第756號解釋和美國判例法，與目前臺灣現行監獄法規有關接見與通信之規定，進行比對，提出修正芻議，提供法務與矯正當局日後修法之參考依據。

In December, 2017, Justices of the Taiwanese Judicial Yuan's Constitutional Court issued Interpretation No. 756 holding that the current articles in Prison Act and its related regulations pertaining to inmates' confidential correspondence and limiting inmates' right to the press unconstitutionally violated Article 11 and 12 in the R.O.C. Constitution. This judicial action has led to significant impacts on correctional practices. In regard to Interpretation No. 756 and resulting actions taken by prison administrators, this study first of all explores the actual cases leading up to the judicial action, then highlights the unique points of view articulated by the Justices, and then analyzes the most noteworthy impacts this interpretation has had on inmates' rights and correctional management. Next, reflecting a genuinely comparative perspective, this study contrasts U.S. federal-level and state-level court holdings related to inmates' freedom of speech and access to the press to these actions taken in Taiwan. Specifically, the Turner test and some derivative corrections system regulations are examined closely for their implications for Taiwanese jurisprudence and correction facilities management. Finally, based on this analysis of constitutionality challenges to prison regulations this study provides commentary for the benefits of correctional administrators and lawmakers regarding future revision of the Prison Act and its related regulations.