毒品施用者之程序正義保障——觀察勒戒裁定之聽審權實踐與改革

Protection of Procedural Justice for Drug Users: Implementation and Reform of the Right to Be Heard in Drug Treatment Court Proceedings

為本文探討司法戒治裁定程序中毒品使用者聽審權之議題。我國毒品危害防制條例規定，初次或於一定期間後再犯施用第一、二級毒品者，應先經觀察、勒戒程序。此程序由檢察官向法院聲請裁定，涉及人身自由之限制，故有探討聽審權保障之必要。
本文首先梳理觀察勒戒程序之演變，特別聚焦2020年1月修法後之變化。其次，藉由司法院大法官解釋，尤其是釋字第799號解釋，闡述聽審權之憲法意涵及其在類似程序中之適用。本文進而分析聽審權之內涵，包含請求資訊權、請求表達權及請求注意權，並論證其在觀察勒戒程序中之適用必要性。
針對如何兼顧被告聽審權保護與程序進行，本文提出數項建議︰一、修正毒品條例，明定法院應訊問被告後始得裁定；二、修法前，基於最小主義理念，採取下列措施︰(1)在警詢、檢察官複訊及法官審理階段，使被告得以表達意願；(2)善用毒品防制中心之「貫穿式司法保護」機制，提供被告資訊及表達機會；(3)由法院或檢察官將聲請書送達被告，確保其知悉理由並得陳述意見。
本文認為，上述建議能在現行制度下，適度平衡效率與人權保障。然而，長遠而言，仍應透過立法修正，明確規範觀察勒戒程序中之聽審權保障，以符合憲法正當法律程序之要求。

This paper examines the protection of the right to be heard for drug users in Taiwan's court-ordered observation and rehabilitation proceedings. It traces the evolution of these procedures, focusing on the 2020 amendment to the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act. Drawing on Constitutional Court interpretations, particularly No. 799, the paper analyzes the components of the right to be heard and argues for its application in these proceedings.
To balance defendants' rights with procedural efficiency, the paper proposes: 1) Amending the Act to mandate court interrogation before issuingrulings; 2) Adopting minimalist measures before legislative changes, including allowing defendants to express their wishes during legal proceedings, utilizing drug prevention centers' ''comprehensive judicial protection'' mechanism, and ensuring defendants receive and can respond to petitions.
The paper concludes that these suggestions may temporarily balance efficiency and rights protection; however, comprehensive legislative reform is essential to fully satisfy constitutional due process requirements.