查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 無罪推定原則於撤銷緩刑及假釋之適用--歐洲法、德國法與我國法之比較評析
- 無罪推定作為舉證責任及證據評價規則--歐洲人權法院相關裁判及評析
- 當事人進行主義與無罪推定原則
- 刑事舉證責任與無罪推定
- 論中共偵查辯護制度之理論基礎--無罪推定原則
- 論刑事程序原則
- 集會及結社自由權:歐洲人權法院判決之分析
- Public Service, Free Expression and European Convention on Human Rights
- 歐洲人權法院--歷史、組織、職權及程序
- The Right to Freedom of Expression and the Protection of Health and Morals--The Jurisprudence of the European Convention on Human Rights
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 無罪推定原則於撤銷緩刑及假釋之適用--歐洲法、德國法與我國法之比較評析=The Application of the Principle of Presumption of Innocence in Retraction of Suspension of Punishment and Parole: A Comparative Analysis of the Law in Europe, Germany and Taiwan |
---|---|
作 者 | 林鈺雄; | 書刊名 | 政大法學評論 |
卷 期 | 117 2010.10[民99.10] |
頁 次 | 頁223-267 |
分類號 | 586.8 |
關鍵詞 | 無罪推定原則; 撤銷緩刑; 撤銷假釋; 歐洲人權法院; Presumption of innocence; Suspension of punishment; Parole; Retraction; European court of human rights; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 緩刑及假釋由於以受判決人「另犯他罪」為撤銷事由之一,因而引發撤銷法院應否基於無罪推定原則,等待他案審理法院判決或確定之疑慮。此項議題,於我國法、德國法及歐洲法,皆曾有爭論。我國於二○○六年施行的新刑法,明定另犯他罪的撤銷緩刑事由,以他罪「判決確定」為前提,形式上似乎迴避了違反無罪推定原則的疑義,但一來造成刑事政策上此項撤銷事由幾無實益可言,因為通常等到他罪判決確定時本案緩刑期間早已經過,二來同時導致實務捨此事由改以其他門檻較低的撤銷事由,作為撤銷緩刑的依據。本文從比較法觀點,以歐洲人權法院的標竿裁判-Böhmerv. Germany-為例,並以德國法的回應為輔,說明以上的兩難處境以及可能出路,最後並提出立法論的建議方向,代為結語。 |
英文摘要 | Since "the commission of another crime" has often been taken as one of the causes leading to the retraction of one's suspension of punishment or parole, an issue arising from the principle "presumption of innocence" has been discussed: whether the retracting court has to follow the judgment of the court that is trying another crime. The ECHR once expressed its opinion that the principle "presumption of innocence" is violated in the case when the court takes its own guilty finding as the basis of quashing one's suspension of punishment or parole. This judgement has aroused the concerns about legal theory and real practice in Germany. In contrast, Taiwanese Criminal Law, in which a settled conviction of another crime is provided as one of the re quirements of retraction, offers a rather clear standard. However, in view of the criticisms about the ECHR's judgment mentioned above, this standard is likely to have shortcomings from the aspect of criminal policy. Besides, there is also a serious contradiction between this requirement of retraction and others in Taiwanese Criminal Law. To adjust this lack of balance in all the causes of retraction, an amendment may prove to be most effective. Otherwise, considering that a settled conviction has been widely adopted as the cause for quashing one's suspension of punishment and parole in Taiwan, the introduction of more flexible measures are necessary. As in Germany, retraction is never the only legal option to sanction the violation of conditions for suspension of punishment or parole. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。