查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Juvenile Correctional Policy Enforcement: Taiwan Case=少年矯正政策之實施:臺灣案例 |
---|---|
作 者 | 林秋蘭; | 書刊名 | 中國行政評論 |
卷 期 | 15:2 民95.03 |
頁 次 | 頁93-126 |
分類號 | 548.7114 |
關鍵詞 | 少年事件處理法; 少年矯正政策評估; 少年犯; 少年矯正學校; 少年輔育院; Criminal Law of Juvenile; Juvenile correctional policy evaluation; Uveniledelinquency; Juvenile correction school; Juvenile reformatory school; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 本研究為探討一個社會事件,引發修法的合適性。記得八十五年十一月新竹少年監獄暴動後,受到各界關注,在前立委謝啟大召集各有關人員經研討之後,認為少年人格未臻成熟,過去採「教刑並重」不合適,宜採「以教代刑」,遂而引發八十六年十月二十九日修正「少年事件處理法」,共修正了八十二條條文。直接影響到少年矯正政策之機構性處遇方式。在新法修正後,少年涉及刑事案件被判刑或拘役後,原在新竹少監執行,改至高雄明陽中學接受矯正教育。少年涉保護事件裁定感化教育,原在輔育院執行,改在新竹誠正中學執行。但桃輔與彰輔須於九十二年完成改制。本研究主要目的是探討: 1.修正少年事件處理法後,新少年矯正政策採「以教代刑」、「重罪輕罰」,是否能通過法律比例原則與社會公平正義的批判。 2.新的少年矯正政策績效,能否優於舊的少年矯正政策?本研究共分為六章,試圖先從德、美、日、中等四國少年法立法的原則目的來觀其理論基礎的意涵,復而採用執行評估與成果評估的方法(包括少年再犯率、成本效益分析與少年行為改變),以解析此項新少年矯正政策(指誠正與明陽)是否合乎時宜,並與舊少年矯正政策(指桃輔與彰輔)作比較,最後運用政策論證的方式來評斷該政策的良莠和基本邏輯是否合理。研究方法:採文獻分析法、問卷調查法、晤談法、官方犯罪統計及政策論證等方法。研究樣本採分層隨機抽樣,收容少年有效樣本計有249名,員工有效樣本計有77名。並以自編之「收容少年能力與行為改變自我評估表」及「少年矯正機構領導幹部基層人員工作滿足度調查表」,作為檢驗政策目標達成的指標。問卷資料運用SPSS軟體來處理,統計方法採用person積差相關,Cronbach α係數,因素分析,t檢定,one-way ANOVA單因子變異數分析,及x^2等。研究結果: 1.各國少年法立法皆採「教刑並重」、「重罪重罰」,我國獨採「以教代刑」。 2.新少年矯正政策機構收容少年之再犯率比舊少年矯正政策機構稍低,大約只有1%至4%差距,卻要花兩倍多的成本。即平均每一收容少年每年花費金額明陽與誠正為56萬元,而桃輔與彰輔為26萬元。 3.少年行為改變方面桃輔優於誠正、彰輔和明陽。 4.新少年矯正機構雖擁有較佳的人力、財力與設備,但因組織結構設計不良,誠正面臨每年四個學期制的壓力,老師和學生都無喘息的機會;明陽中學倒是在重罪輕罰的看法上,教育人員與矯正人員理念不合,前者主張寬,後者主張嚴;桃輔與彰輔面臨九十二年改制的相同命運,員工多不希望改制,除了改制後某些職位會提高官等還有一點吸引力之外,其餘皆無,因此整個組織呈現不安的氣氛。最後將研究發現,作政策論證的邏輯思考,「重罪輕罰」、「以教代刑」皆難以通過法律比例原則與社會公平正義的批判。故此,建議將來修正少年事件處理法時恢復「教刑並重、重罪重罰」,俾能增進少年矯正政策之效能。未來研究宜從本土犯罪原因、法理學、法哲學來衡量罪與罰之標準。 |
英文摘要 | In November, 1996 Hsin-chu Juvenile Prison happened a riot, which drew the public attention on juvenile correctional policy. Then, the Taiwan Legislature revise Juvenile Criminal Dispose Law with educational mechanism instead of punishment in 1997. Therefore, the revised Law impacts the position of correctional organization. For example, a juvenile criminal sent to junior high school to take correctional education instead of sending to juvenile prison or juvenile reformatory school. The study was designed to evaluate whether correctional performance of "education instead of punishment" is better than that of "balance between education and punishment" and the achievability of correctional policy goal by "education instead of punishment" alternative. The paper contained 3 parts, including: ◎ Overview of the juvenile Law's principles, purposes and theory basis of German, USA, Japan and Taiwan. ◎ Using repeat rate, cost and benefit analysis and behavior change, etc. To evaluate the execution and result performance. ◎ Compare with that before the Law revised. Data were collected: ◎ Using records research, questionnaire, interview. ◎ Using sampling; juvenile sample 249, correctional organization staff 77. ◎ Using "juvenile in prison capability and behavior change self evaluation table (or questionnaire)" and "correctional organization staff work satisfaction investigation table (or questionnaire)" designed by the author. The data provided some support for the contention that 1.Only Taiwan use "education replace punishment", other countries use "education and punishment balance", serious crime heavy punishment. 2.Juvenile criminal after new correctional organization's correction activities re-commit rate is 1-4% less than the old correction organization. But the cost is doubled. 3.As for behavior change, Taiwan Tao-Yuan juvenile reformatory school is better than that junior high school. 4.Manpower, equipment and financial: new correctional organization is better. But their organization structure is not good enough. 5."Education replace punishment" and serious crime light punishment do not meet the proportion principle or justice. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。