月旦知識庫
 
  1. 熱門:
 
首頁 臺灣期刊   法律   公行政治   醫事相關   財經   社會學   教育   其他 大陸期刊   核心   重要期刊 DOI文章
國立臺灣大學法學論叢 本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
  【月旦知識庫】是否收錄該篇全文,敬請【登入】查詢為準。
最新【購點活動】


篇名
2021年刑事立法與實務發展回顧:以治安與治療為名
並列篇名
Developments in the Criminal Law in 2021: In the Name of Public Security and Treatment
作者 謝煜偉
中文摘要
本文以2021年刑事立法及實務見解為論述對象,整理去年度當中,具有代表性或批判意義的修法條文、最高法院判決、大法庭裁定以及大法官解釋,並分析這些立法內容與實務見解中所關心的議題取向和重要的發展脈絡。在刑事立法的部分,本文發現主政者仍習慣於追求以刑事立法回應因社會矚目案件所引發的民怨,交通事故危險的領域尤甚。然倉促躁進的立法反而會形成更多解釋適用上的實務難題,值得主管機關及立法者深思。如何藉由修法諮詢方式的革新實質提升立法的細緻度及周詳度,是接下來政府應重視的問題。其次,就實務判解的部分,針對社會抗爭運動能否阻卻違法,以及象徵性言論的違法評價,最高法院判決具有影響深遠的意義。大法庭制度運作以來,確實有效發揮統一法律見解的作用,並且藉由大法庭的場域促進實務與學術的實質交流,值得肯定。最後,也是最重要的,司法院大法官解釋針對以改善矯治為目的的保安處分提出所謂「明顯區隔原則」概念,具體處理保安處分中有關強制治療與強制工作的合憲性議題,意味深遠。但明顯區隔原則的操作也可能潛藏著架空刑法基本原則的疑慮,以治療為名義的人身拘束處分可能帶有更嚴重的違憲問題,值得我們後續關注。
英文摘要
This article analyzes the major issues and important developments in the content of the legislation and interpretations of the criminal law in 2021.First, in the case of criminal legislation, this article reviews the amendments to the offense of interference with public order, negligent homicide, aggravated sexual assault, and hit-and-run, and makes critical suggestions for each. It can be observed that in recent years, legislators still prefer to respond to public grievances arising from social incidents with punitive legislation, especially in the area of traffic accidents. However, the absence of well-thought-out criminal legislation may lead to more difficulties of application in the future, which is worthy of deep consideration by the legislators. We should consider strengthening the integrity and sophistication of the criminal legislation process in the future. Second, with regard to the court's decision, the Supreme Court, recognizing “right to resist” and “right to avert imminent national hazard”, made an important judgment that strongly states social and political protest or symbolic speech which is often accompanied by violence will not be illegal as long as it meets the applicable conditions. The Joint Senate for Criminal Cases of the Supreme Court has effectively served to unify different legal opinions. The Joint Senate indeed plays an important role in resolving of conflicting interpretations. Finally, and most importantly, J.Y. Interpretation No. 799, which is ruling on compulsory treatment for sexual assault crime offenders, puts forward “principle of clear separation” for the first time. This principle also appears in J.Y. Interpretation No. 812, which rules that the order of compulsory labor in penal code is unconstitutional. Both interpretations declare ambitious institutional goals and core concepts of criminal treatment, and deserve recognition. However, we should be noticed that the huge gap between ideal and status quo may also be suspected of overriding basic principles of criminal justice. It may be a more serious constitutional issue that deserves our attention when social exclusion and isolation happens in the name of treatment.
起訖頁 1223-1255
關鍵詞 司法院釋字799號解釋明顯區隔原則強制治療處分刑事大法庭刑事立法過失致死罪象徵性言論J.Y. Interpretation No. 799principle of clear separationcompulsory treatmentthe Joint Senate for Criminal Casescriminal legislationnegligent homicidesymbolic speech
刊名 國立臺灣大學法學論叢  
期數 202211 (51特刊期)
出版單位 國立臺灣大學法律學系
該期刊-上一篇 2021年民事程序法發展回顧:訴權保障與審判權確定
該期刊-下一篇 2021年刑事程序法發展回顧:刑事司法數位化的新篇──遠距視訊審理與司法聯盟鏈
 

新書閱讀



最新影音


優惠活動




讀者服務專線:+886-2-23756688 傳真:+886-2-23318496
地址:臺北市館前路28 號 7 樓 客服信箱
Copyright © 元照出版 All rights reserved. 版權所有,禁止轉貼節錄