提審於長期行政拘禁之審查範圍──評Boumediene案

The Scope of Habeas Review in Long-Term Executive Detention–A Comment on Boumediene

Boumediene案中為處理一般救濟程序是否屬人身保護令適切替代程序之問題，從審查範圍之概念切入，復因本案之審理標的，即敵方戰鬥人員之拘禁，係屬學理上所稱基於本案之長期行政拘禁，故當美國最高法院闡釋於此場合之合憲審查範圍問題時，提出兩項極具啟發性之概念：一是揭示人身保護令屬因事制宜之救濟機制，故審查範圍係因事件之性質而異，並提出三項決定審查範圍之判準；二是強調在長期拘禁此等場合擴大審查範圍之關鍵，係在於強化人身保護令之事實調查權限。此兩項重要之見解，對於我國未來提審法制之完善建構，不僅皆具高度參考價值，且恐有相當繼受之必要性。

In the landmark case Boumediene v. Bush, when facing the question whether the system of the Combatants Status Review Tribunals (CSRT) combined with two other statutes were an adequate substitute for habeas review in designating enemy combatants, who were confronted with the danger of long-term detention, the Supreme Court of the United States began with the concept of the scope of review to deal with this issue. Firstly, the Court stressed that since habeas corpus is an adaptable remedy, the scope of habeas review should be larger in the cases of long-term detention such as enemy combatants’in Boumediene. Secondly, the fundamental way to expand scope of review in the cases of long-term detention is to add factual-finding power to habeas corpus review. Furthermore, the Supreme Court of the United States mentioned that to strengthen the factual-finding power of a habeas court, it requires some essential procedural elements such as to admit newly-discovered exculpatory evidence in the habeas corpus procedure.