憲法明顯區隔要求之研究-以司法院大法官釋字第799號為中心;A Study of Constitutional Requirement of Explicit Distinctions：Centered on the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.799

NCUIR > College of Hakka Studies > Graduate Institute of Law and Government > Electronic Thesis & Dissertation > Item 987654321/87184

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.lib.ncu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/87184

Title:	憲法明顯區隔要求之研究-以司法院大法官釋字第799號為中心;A Study of Constitutional Requirement of Explicit Distinctions：Centered on the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.799
Authors:	黃馨德;HUANG, HSIN TE
Contributors:	法律與政府研究所
Keywords:	憲法明顯區隔要求;司法院大法官釋字第799號;刑後強制治療;Constitutional Requirement of Explicit Distinctions;Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.799;compulsory treatment after served the sentence
Date:	2021-10-25
Issue Date:	2021-12-07 15:53:05 (UTC+8)
Publisher:	國立中央大學
Abstract:	憲法明顯區隔要求是一個全新的憲法概念，司法院大法官於釋字第799號解釋拋出此原則，而該號解釋主要係涉及刑法第91條之1第2項前段及性侵害犯罪防治法第22條之1第3項，有關性犯罪者刑後強制治療制度之規範。大法官認為以我國刑後強制治療制度長年運作下恐將趨近於刑罰，與保安處分之定性不符，有悖於與刑罰之執行應有明顯區隔之憲法上要求，故大法官具體地指出幾項待改善之部分，要求不論立法、治療處所之環境設施、實際運作等方面均應為有效之調整改善。惟，大法官雖提出「憲法明顯區隔要求」之概念，就其法律上之定義及定位卻未多加解釋，故本文企圖以憲法第8條人身自由之保障出發，分析二者間之相互關係，試圖就大法官未加說明之部分提出淺見。因此，憲法明顯區隔要求於法律上之地位即為本文首要探討之議題。性犯罪一直以來都是社會上所關注之議題，然多數人僅著重於性犯罪者之處罰，對於刑後強制治療之治療處所、受處遇者之救濟途徑及人權保障多為忽略，可見現今制度仍有需要改善之空間。依據我國現況，刑後強制治療之場所主要設立於培德醫院，表面上看似為醫院，實質上卻係附屬於臺中監獄，使得受處遇者立於受刑人般之地位接受治療，連帶也影響了治療之成效。是以，探討美國、德國等先進國家之刑後強制治療制度成為本文第二個鑽研議題，透過美國民事監護制度及德國保安監禁制度之研究，萃取外國法上之優點，對我國未來立法及執行上提出建議，以達憲法明顯區隔之要求。;ustice believes that my country’s post-criminal compulsory treatment system may be close to punishment under long-term operation, which is inconsistent with the qualitative nature of security sanctions and runs counter to the constitutional requirements that should be clearly separated from the enforcement of punishments. Therefore, the justice specifically pointed out Several areas to be improved require effective adjustment and improvement regardless of the legislation, environmental facilities of the treatment facility, and actual operation. However, although the Chief Justice put forward the concept of " Constitutional Requirement of Explicit Distinctions," he did not explain its legal definition and positioning. Therefore, this article attempts to analyze the relationship between the two based on the protection of personal freedom in Article 8 of the Constitution. , Trying to make a brief comment on the part that the justice did not explain. Therefore, the legal status of the constitution′s obvious distinction requirements is the primary issue discussed in this article. Sexual crimes have always been a topic of concern in the society. However, most people only focus on the punishment of sexual offenders. The treatment facilities for compulsory treatment after sentence, the means of relief for the victims, and the protection of human rights are mostly ignored. It can be seen that today There is still room for improvement in the system. According to the current situation of our country, the place of compulsory treatment after sentence is mainly set up in Peide Hospital. It looks like a hospital, but in fact it is attached to Taichung Prison, making the victim receive treatment in the same status as a prisoner. Affected the effectiveness of treatment. Therefore, discussing the post-criminal compulsory treatment system in advanced countries such as the United States and Germany has become the second research topic of this article. Through the study of the American civil guardianship system and the German security imprisonment system, the advantages of foreign laws are extracted, and the future legislation and enforcement of my country It made recommendations to meet the Constitutional Requirement of Explicit Distinctions.
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Law and Government] Electronic Thesis & Dissertation

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
index.html		0Kb	HTML	213	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...