查詢結果分析
來源資料
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | 即使戰爭,也要人權--Hamdi及Hamdan判決評論=Even in Wartime, Rights Are Needful--Comments on Hamdi and Hamdan |
---|---|
作者姓名(中文) | 廖福特; | 書刊名 | 歐美研究 |
卷期 | 39:4 2009.12[民98.12] |
頁次 | 頁671-711 |
專輯 | 「美國最高法院重要判決之研究:二○○四~二○○六」專題 |
分類號 | 579.27 |
關鍵詞 | 人身保護令; 正當程序; 軍事委員會; 日內瓦公約; 反恐戰爭; Writ of habeas corpus; Due Process Clause; Military Commission; Geneva Convention; War on terror; |
語文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 本文分析Hamdi及Hamdan判決,以探討武裝衝突下之權利保障,本文認為兩個判決結論都值得贊同,但是對於論證內容,本文有不同看法。在Hamdi案,本文認為可以直接認定國會沒有授權行政拘禁,亦未暫停人身保護令,因此當事人人身自由應受到保護。在Hamdan案,本文認為應認定美國攻打阿富汗為國際武裝衝突,因而依據「日內瓦公約」,當事人不應由軍事委員會審判,同時審判過程亦應符合公平審判權之內容。 本文認為由於最高法院幾位法官之堅持及部分法官對於「日內瓦公約」之重視,才能堅持權利保障。 |
英文摘要 | This essay, through an analysis of two judgments, Hamdi and Hamdan, explores rights under conditions of armed conflicts. It agrees with the conclusions of these two judgments, but offers differ-ent arguments. This essay argues that in Hamdi it is better for the Su-preme Court to say, since the Congress neither authorized administra-tive detention nor suspended the writ of habeas corpus, personal lib-erty should be guaranteed. It also argues that in Hamdan, the war between the US and Afghanistan should be regarded as an interna-tional armed conflict. Hamdan, according to the Third Geneva Con-vention, should be therefore treated as a prisoner of war and tried by a military or civil court. This essay considers that due to the insistence of several judges, and reference to the Geneva Convention, rights were protected. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。