英文摘要 |
The regulations on Non-Institutional Treatment in Germany are very different from those in Taiwan. Especially in the extremely unpopular Security Measures legal system, the compatibility between the two countries is quite low. However, criminal law education has long emphasized the inheritance of the European legal system in the past, which has led to misunderstandings by the compatriots. In fact, Suspend Litigation, Suspended Penalties, Parole, Protection Control, Behavior Supervision, Additional Orders, Lifetime probation, Exchange Penalty Action, Re vocation and Relief, and even the role of the front-line workers... etc., those are all very different from the relevant regulations in Taiwan. Moreover, the Non-Institutional Treatment in Germany has been influenced by the relevant fields in the United Kingdom and the United States in the past 20 years. Their organizational systems and business fields have undergone rapid changes. The current state of the legal practice has transformed from the traditional criminal penalty framework into the concept of''Judicial Social Services''. Then the whole system is developing towards diversification, flexibility and socialization, and even the possibility of privatization in the future. Our country is on the occasion of judicial reform, the National Conference on Judicial Reform also decided to formulate special legal for the Probation System and Community Corrections as soon as possible. Therefore, this article explain the relevant norms from the investigation, trial, and execution stages of German Criminal Proceedings, to clarify the relevant concepts of Non-Institutional Treatment. Especially in terms of the parole action with interest means of reintegration, the community correction centered on probation officers, the probationer's maintain obligations of goodwills, the nature of parole and probation, identification between probation experiments and behavioral supervision, as well as the comparison between the German exchange penalty action and Taiwan's Social Labor for short-term penal punishment. This article also discusses what our country suit to borrowing from the perspective of comparative law. It also includes an overview of the operation of National Electronic Monitoring Center (Gemeinsame elektronische Überwachungsstelle der Länder: GÜL) at Hessischen Bad Vilbel after its establishment. In addition, the process of changing back after privatization of Baden-Wurttemberg to provide a reference to those of insight. |