論日本刑訴偵審程序中「合意制度」之創設及對我國之啟示

Discussion on the Legislation of“Agreement on Cooperation in Collection of Evidence and Prosecution”in Japan’s Criminal Procedure Law and the Enlightenment to Taiwan

繼「裁判員制度」之後，日本刑事訴訟法在二○一六年再一次大幅修法。其中，最受矚目的就是「合意制度」的創設。這一套全新制度，歷時六年始完成立法，在立法過程已經是輿論焦點，在二○一八年六月一日實施後，成為各界的觀察重點。其創設之導火線源自於轟動一時的「證據竄改事件」，希望藉此制度的設計，一方面提供檢察官多元化的偵查手法，另一方面則是導正檢察官對偵訊筆錄的過度依賴。本文先介紹其立法原委，繼而詳細說明其制度細節與實際案例，彙整合意制度在日本所引發之爭議與批判，最後對於合意制度是否適於引進我國，提出個人之評論與建議。

Japan Congress amended the Criminal Procedure Law in 2016 and added a chapter on “Agreement on Cooperation in Collection of Evidence and Prosecution”, and the importance of this amendment is secondary to the saiban-in law in 2004. In the amendments this time, the most eye-catching is the creation of the “Procedures for Agreement and Consultation” in criminal procedure. This whole new procedure took six years (2010-2016) to complete the legislation, and being the centre of attention after the implementation in 2018. There are two purposes of this procedure: 1. Providing the prosecutor with a variety of investigative method; 2. Correcting prosecutors’ over-reliance on investigation records. The study introduces the legislative background, then elaborates the particulars of the procedure and actual cases, and summarizes the controversies and criticisms in Japan. Finally, it provides personal comments and suggestions on whether the procedure is suitable for Taiwan.