我國建立完善刑事證物保管制度之研究

The Research on the Criminal Evidence Management Procedure in Taiwan

2017年8月，總統府統籌召開「司法改革國是會議」總結會議，明記刑事訴訟程序修法方向，包括採行起訴狀一本主義，強化言詞、直接審理原則落實堅實第一審，建立上尖下寬的金字塔型訴訟制度。同時，有關「規範證據監管制度及判決確定後之證物保管期限與方法」，決議：「建請行政院會同司法院共同研議，建立證據監管及判決確定後之證物保管制度，規範證據監管之方法及保管期限，並明確規範違反之法律效果。」亦即，刑事審判犯罪事實之證明，大致藉由物的證據、供述證據搭配適用相輔相成。物證於真相還原或屬「啞巴證據」，其單獨存在或難說明要證事實。相對地，「空口白話」供述證據的證明力評價，須輔以物證無言、不動之特性方能驗證真實。同時，刑事程序採行「證據裁判主義」，物證蒐集保全、保管過程確保其真正性、同一性，攸關被告權利、偵審公信以及司法公平。然而，臺灣有關證物保管規範、運用現制之檢討，學界與實務並未予以相應的關注。本研究回顧近年我國司法改革進程、檢討實務案例及相關司法判決，藉比較法研究對照外國制度瞭解國際學理趨勢，並實地訪查偵審機關掌握本土實務困境，同時設定議題綜整國內日、德、美學者專家意見，用以研擬具體可行的政策規劃、提出適合本地的規範建議。亦即，刑事審判基於正當法律程序（Due Process of Law）法理，本研究認為國家機關證據保管、管理過程「內部控管」的程序違失，以致影響證據真正性、同一性之虞者，與偵查蒐證保全「自外取得」的程序違失，其規範適用「排除法則」條文規範容有差別。惟證據保管內部控管的核心理念，首重程序過程證物真實、真正之維護，用以確保司法正確認事用法、真相釐清。換言之，證據保管管理過程內部控管或有違失，以致若有偽變造、變質散逸等等疑慮，或者偵查現場蒐證保全與法庭審理證據調查之證據同一性若有疑義，即對其證據能力、證明力的判斷有所影響。因此，考量現行實務運作有關證物保管規範制度仍屬單薄，建議刑事訴訟法應有提綱契領之條文規範，輔以偵審機關內部具體明確的行政規則，實務運作強化物流化的證物管理、紀律化的證物管理、科層化的證物管理，確保我國偵審過程物證真正性、同一性，用以維護審判公平、司法公信。

In August 2017, the“National Conference on Judicial Reform”convened by the Presidential Office concluded several resolutions for the direction of judicial reform, including the adoption of the doctrine of the indictment, the strengthening of the principle of direct trial implemented in the first instance, and rebuild a pyramid type litigation system, etc. Evidence plays the most crucial role in a trial to determine facts, so regulation of the evidence preservation system and the period and method of preserving evidence after verdict confirmed are also essential directions in the judicial reform. This study reviews the progress of judicial reform and judicial decisions concerning criminal evidence preservation issues in Taiwan and explores evidence preservation theories and rules by comparative law research. The site visits for two police agencies, public prosecutor’s offices, and district courts are conducted to understand the procedures and problems of Taiwan’s evidence preservation procedures. Expert opinions for evidence preservation and management rules are also gathering by the focus forums. It is recommended that principles of evidence authentication should be legislated into the criminal procedure law, and complete evidence management rules should be introduced into the police, prosecution, and court system in Taiwan. Finally, improve a hierarchical evidence management system to ensure evidence’s authentication and truthiness is the foundation for fair trials.