Publications-Theses
Article View/Open
Publication Export
-
Google ScholarTM
NCCU Library
Citation Infomation
Related Publications in TAIR
題名 跨境犯罪與刑事互助研究 - 以臺美合作實務為例
Cross-Border Crimes and Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters: Case Study on the Taiwan-United States Cooperation Practices作者 柯智堯
Ke, Chih-Yao貢獻者 蔡沛倫
Tsai, Pei-Lun
柯智堯
Ke, Chih-Yao關鍵詞 跨境犯罪偵查
刑事司法互助
臺美刑事互助
誘捕偵查
駐外聯絡官
Cooperation in criminal matters
Cross-border crime investigation
Taiwan-U.S. mutual legal assistance in criminal matters日期 2026 上傳時間 2-Mar-2026 13:24:45 (UTC+8) 摘要 我國自1984年退出國際刑警組織後，在跨境犯罪偵查與國際刑事司法合作上面臨結構性限制。然而，面對全球化所帶來的犯罪跨境化趨勢，我國仍需與他國建立有效的司法互助機制。在此背景下，臺美刑事司法合作因雙邊緊密的經貿往來與共同的安全利益，成為我國國際刑事合作的重要典範。本研究以臺美刑事司法互助為個案，探討特殊國際處境下跨境犯罪偵查合作的運作模式、面臨困境與可行策略，期能為我國與其他國家深化司法合作提供參考。 本研究採用質性研究方法，結合文獻分析與個案研究途徑。首先透過歷史文獻回顧我國參與國際刑警組織的歷程及退出後的因應機制；其次，研析臺美不同時期的雙邊刑事司法合作並比較分析臺美兩國在檢警制度、執法文化與司法互助運作上的異同；最後，以三件具代表性的跨境刑事案件（大麻走私案、暗網槍砲案、3D列印槍械案）為例，深入剖析臺美合作的實務運作、證據能力爭議及誘捕偵查的法律界限。 研究發現，臺、美刑事合作呈現「行政先行、司法補強」的雙軌模式，透過警察駐外聯絡官機制與正式司法互助協定的相互配合，有效克服外交限制。然而，本研究亦揭示三項關鍵挑戰：其一，我國缺乏跨機關任務去衝突機制，影響執法協調效率；其二，駐外聯絡官數量與分布不足，限制合作深度；其三，數位鑑識與暗網偵查能力落後，高度依賴外國技術支援。此外，個案分析顯示，美國「犯罪傾向測試」與我國「陷害教唆理論」在誘捕偵查標準上，司法實務對於犯意創生之共同觀點。 本研究的學術貢獻在於首次系統性分析臺美刑事合作在制度面、執行面與技術面的完整樣貌，並透過實務案例深化對跨境誘捕偵查、控制下交付、非正式情資交換等創新合作模式的理論認識。實務貢獻方面，本研究提出建立任務去衝突系統、擴增駐外聯絡官據點、強化數位鑑識能力等具體建議，可作為我國精進國際刑事合作制度之參考，亦為其他面臨類似國際處境之國家或地區提供可資借鏡的經驗。
Since Taiwan’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) in 1984, the Republic of China (Taiwan) has confronted structural constraints in cross-border crime investigation and international criminal judicial cooperation. However, in response to the trend of transnational crimes driven by globalization, Taiwan must establish effective judicial mutual assistance mechanisms with other nations. In this context, Taiwan-US criminal judicial cooperation, owing to close bilateral economic ties and shared security interests, has become a significant model for Taiwan’s international criminal cooperation. This study takes Taiwan-US criminal mutual legal assistance as a case study to explore the operational models, challenges, and feasible strategies for cross-border crime investigation cooperation under Taiwan’s unique international standing, aiming to provide reference for deepening judicial cooperation between Taiwan and other countries. This research employs qualitative research methods, combining documentary analysis and case study approaches. First, it reviews Taiwan’s participation in and later exit from INTERPOL and examines the responses developed after withdrawal. Second, it provides an overview of Taiwan-United States cooperation in criminal matters at different periods of time and conducts a comparative analysis of the similarities and differences between Taiwan and the United States in their prosecutorial and police systems, law enforcement cultures, and judicial mutual assistance operations. Finally, using three prominent cross-border criminal cases (marijuana trafficking, darknet firearms, and 3D-printed firearms) as examples, it provides an in-depth analysis of the practical operations of Taiwan-US cooperation, evidentiary admissibility disputes, and the legal boundaries of entrapment investigation. The research reveals that Taiwan-US cooperation in criminal matters exhibits a dual-track model with administrative channels as the initial tool and judicial cooperation as supplementary means, effectively overcoming diplomatic limitations through coordination of overseas police liaison officer mechanisms and formal judicial mutual assistance agreements. However, this study also identifies three critical challenges: first, Taiwan lacks an inter-agency task deconfliction mechanism, affecting law enforcement coordination efficiency; second, the number and coverage of overseas liaison officers are insufficient, limiting the depth of cooperation; third, digital forensics and darknet investigation capabilities lag behind, resulting in high dependence on foreign technical support. Furthermore, case analysis demonstrates that while the US “predisposition test” and Taiwan’s “entrapment by estoppel theory” differ in their standards for entrapment investigation, judicial practice in both jurisdictions shares common perspectives regarding the generation of criminal intent. The academic contribution of this study lies in providing the first systematic analysis of the complete picture of Taiwan-US criminal cooperation across institutional, operational, and technical dimensions, deepening theoretical understanding of innovative cooperation models such as cross-border entrapment investigation, controlled delivery, and informal intelligence exchange through practical cases. In terms of practical contributions, this research proposes specific recommendations including establishing a task deconfliction system, expanding overseas liaison officer positions, and strengthening digital forensics capabilities, which can serve as a reference for Taiwan to refine its international criminal cooperation mechanisms and provide valuable experience for other countries or regions facing similar international circumstances.參考文獻 壹、中文部分 一、書籍 內政部警政署(1983)。《我國參加國際刑警組織始末暨中華民國中央局工作概況》。臺北：內政部警政署。 丘宏達(2006)。《現代國際法》(二版)。臺北：三民書局。 吳和堂(2021)。《教育論文寫作與實用技巧》。臺北：高等教育文化事業有限公司。 孫正華(2007)。《兩岸司法互助之研究——以臺灣對大陸地區法院裁判之認可與執行為主》。國立臺灣大學國家發展研究所博士論文,未出版,臺北。 張紹勳(2004)。《研究方法》。臺中：滄海書局。 許介鱗(2004)。《戰後臺灣史記》。臺北：前衛出版社。 陳翠蓮(2018)。《重探戰後臺灣政治史：美國、國民黨政府與臺灣社會的三方角力》。臺北：春山出版。 郝柏村(1995)。《郝總長日記中的經國先生晚年》。臺北：天下文化。 二、期刊論文 王雪、潘曉龍(2020)。〈電信詐騙犯罪案件研究——以網絡「殺豬盤」為例〉。《法制博覽》,13期,頁17-21。 宋耀明(2019)。〈臺美刑事司法互助協定之簽訂與實踐〉。《司法官學院犯罪防治研究中心——刑事政策與犯罪研究論文集》,頁1-15。 孟維德(2016)。〈防治跨國犯罪的挑戰與克服關鍵〉。《刑事政策與犯罪防治研究專刊》,頁1-20。 孟維德(2017a)。〈國際情資交換與跨國犯罪偵防〉。《中央警察大學學報》,69期,頁5-6。 孟維德(2017b)。〈駐外國及國際組織執法聯絡官之分析與比較〉。《刑事政策與犯罪防治研究專刊》,第14期,頁38-39。 林筱涵(2008)。〈預約法律性質之研究——以我國實務見解為中心〉。《司法新聲》,48期,頁678-700。 柯慶忠(2004)。〈我國在國際刑警組織的回顧與展望〉。《警學叢刊》,第35卷第3期,頁209-210。 馬躍中（2013）。從罪贓移交看兩岸司法互助問題。法務部調查局展望與探索月刊,第11卷第7期,頁25-27。 黃彥仲(2021)。〈當前我國駐外警察聯絡官職責內涵與跨境執法困境之探究〉。《中央警察大學警學叢刊》,第52卷第2期,頁42-70。 黃振倫、廖倪凰(2019)。〈檢察官偵辦跨國詐欺集團之挑戰〉。《臺灣國際法學刊》,第15卷第2期,頁85-94。 廖宗聖、林燦璋(2011)。〈主權觀念轉變下的刑事司法互助模式之探討〉。《國立中正大學法學集刊》,第35期,頁1-45。 慶啟人(2003a)。〈臺美刑事司法互助協定執行一年之回顧與展望〉。《法學叢刊》,第48卷第4期,頁135-150。 慶啟人(2003b)。〈評中共加入「聯合國打擊跨國有組織犯罪公約」對臺灣之影響〉。《展望與探索月刊》,第1卷第12期,頁97-110。 謝立功(2002)。〈我國警察組織之國際合作現況：正式與非正式的互動剖析〉。《警學叢刊》,第14期,頁45-68。 三、研究報告 內政部警政署(2018-2023)。《警政工作年報》。臺北：內政部警政署。 內政部警政署(2025)。《立法院第11屆第2會期外交及國防委員會、司法及法制委員會第1次聯席會議書面報告》,中華民國113年12月26日。 白維棋(2018)。《日本藥物犯罪取締研討會出國報告》,刊登日期：2018年9月25日。檢自：https：//report.ndc.gov.tw/ReportFront/PageSystem/reportFileDownload/C11100356/001 李雅村(2024)。《國際警察打擊跨境犯罪機制之法制研究》。臺北：立法院法制局專題研究報告。 四、法律判決 最高法院111年度臺上字第2667號刑事判決。 最高法院113年度臺上字第5098號刑事判決。 最高法院114年度臺上字第2480號刑事判決。 臺灣高等法院91年度上更(二)字第905號刑事判決。 臺灣高雄地方法院89年度訴字第323號刑事判決。 臺灣臺北地方法院112年度重訴字第19號刑事判決。 五、網際網路 內政部移民署，上網日期：2026年1月12日，檢自：https://www.immigration.gov.tw/5385/5388/7181/7208/ 中華民國外交部(2024)。〈國際刑警組織納入臺灣可以強化全球安全〉。上網日期：2024年10月31日。檢自：https：//www.taiwanembassy.org/cayyz/post/13677.html 中華民國外交部(2025)。〈臺美防制人口走私販運合作〉。上網日期：2025年10月12日。檢自：https：//www.mofa.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=95&s=66211 中華民國行政院(2022)。〈國際合作與參與〉。上網日期：2022年8月15日。檢自： https：//www.ey.gov.tw/Page/4262CB32EEC7470B/104b00e1-7b17-4fab-a991-414949c66922 中華民國檢察官協會(2025)。官方網站。上網日期：2025年10月11日。檢自：http：//www.prosecutors.org.tw/NewsContent.aspx?id=123&type=1 周峻佑(2024)。〈英國倫敦醫院因服務供應商遭網路攻擊而中斷部分服務〉。iThome。上網日期：2025年9月28日。檢自：https：//www.ithome.com.tw/news/163329 法務部調查局，上網日期：2026年1月12日，檢自：https://www.mjib.gov.tw/EditPage/?PageID=d9a8bab0-889d-4b28-8750-5670d2d15484 法務部(2025a)。〈地檢署基層檢察官如何「升官」?淺談「主任檢察官」的角色功能與產生方式〉。上網日期：2025年1月13日。檢自：https：//www.tpc.moj.gov.tw/292885/976681/661783/1249979/post 法務部(2025b)。〈國際及兩岸司法互助〉。上網日期：2025年10月10日。檢自：https：//www.moj.gov.tw/2204/2205/2263/109335/109336/109341/109716/post 法務部所屬機關(2018)。〈Our Country Becomes a Member of the Asset Recovery Inter-Agency Network of Asia/Pacific (ARIN-AP)〉。上網日期：2018年12月28日。檢自：https：//www.ksw.moj.gov.tw/14348/14394/16607/171546/ 法務部國際及兩岸法律司(2024)。〈司法互助記者會彰顯臺美司法互助里程碑〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.moj.gov.tw/2204/2795/2796/221454/post 法務部調查局(2024)。〈法務部調查局偵辦重大電信詐欺案件暨臺美合作破獲跨境機房成果記者會〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.mjib.gov.tw/news/Details/1/1024 法務部調查局(2025a)。〈國際合作「艾格蒙聯盟 Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units」〉。上網日期：2025年4月19日。檢自：https：//www.mjib.gov.tw/EditPage/?PageID=3d436d3b-b3e0-4374-8834-1f1fc06faee7 法務部調查局(2025b)。〈國際合作機制〉。上網日期：2024年4月25日。檢自：https：//www.mjib.gov.tw/EditPage/?PageID=f99f1229-57ea-47bc-a389-0fb173c1ac5f 法務部廉政署(2022)。〈亞太經濟合作(APEC)反貪腐暨透明化工作小組〉。刊登日期：2022年8月16日。檢自：https：//www.aac.moj.gov.tw/6398/6518/1170119/1170121/Lpsimplelist 海洋委員會(2021)。〈臺美海巡工作小組瞭解備忘錄〉。上網日期：2025年10月12日。檢自：https：//www.oac.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=44&parentpath=0,4&mcustomize=onemessages_view.jsp&dataserno=202104260001 張銘坤(2022)。〈華裔美男涉強盜加密貨幣潛逃來臺 臺美攜手緝獲〉。中央通訊社。上網日期：2022年6月6日。檢自：https：//www.cna.com.tw/news/asoc/202206060080.aspx 陳韻聿(2024)。〈國際刑警組織為政治犧牲專業未納臺灣 中國緊箍咒無解?〉。中央通訊社。上網日期：2025年3月9日。檢自：https：//www.cna.com.tw/news/asoc/202411080015.aspx 資策會科技法律研究所(2018)。〈美國《雲端法》解析〉。上網日期：2025年10月12日。檢自：https：//stli.iii.org.tw/article-detail.aspx?no=55&tp=1&d=8291 臺灣臺中地方檢察署(2025)。〈中檢偵破臺美跨境詐欺洗錢案成果記者會〉。上網日期：2025年5月14日。檢自：https：//www.tcc.moj.gov.tw/295804/295830/657577/1287270/post 警察廣播電臺新聞科(2025)。〈刑事局破獲幫派走私1.2噸大麻市價逾18億 臺美聯手逮5人〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.pbs.npa.gov.tw/ch/app/data/view?module=wg183&id=18740 刑事警察局公共關係室(2025)。〈跨海追緝!臺美聯手破獲制式槍枝走私案 首度赴美取回關鍵證物〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.cib.npa.gov.tw/ch/app/news/view?module=news&id=1885 貳、英文部分 一、書籍 Albanese, J. (2015). Organized Crime： From the Mob to Transnational Organized Crime. New York： Routledge. Bossard, A. (1990). Transnational Crime and Criminal Law. Chicago： University of Chicago, Office of International Criminal Justice. Bowling, B., & Sheptycki, J. (2012). Global Policing. London： SAGE Publications. Carter, D. L. (2005). Law Enforcement Intelligence： A Guide for State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement Agencies (pp. 183-185). Washington, D.C.： U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved March 29, 2006, from https：//cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e09042536.pdf Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2018). America's Courts and the Criminal Justice System (13th ed., pp. 209-211). Boston： Cengage Learning. Peak, K. J. (2020). Justice Administration： Police, Courts, and Corrections Management (9th ed., p. 78). New York： Pearson Education. Shaw, M. N. (2008). International Law (6th ed.). Cambridge： Cambridge University Press. 二、期刊論文 Eberlein, B. (2019). Who Fills the Global Governance Gap? Rethinking the Roles of Business and Government in Global Governance. Organization Studies, 40(3), 393-420. Morse, J. C., & Keohane, R. O. (2014). Contested Multilateralism. The Review of International Organizations, 9(4), 385-412. Sheptycki, J. W. E. (1995). Transnational Policing and the Makings of a Postmodern State. British Journal of Criminology, 35(4), 613-635. 三、政府文件及官方報告 Clayton County Police Department (2020). Standard Operating Procedures (pp. 1-3). Clayton County： Clayton County Police Department. Council of the EU (2025). Organised Crime： A Growing Threat to Democracy (p. 2). Brussels： General Secretariat of the Council. Council of the European Union (2009). Secondment of Liaison Officers and Cooperation of Liaison Officers Posted Abroad (10504/09, pp. 3-6). Brussels： Council Secretariat. Retrieved from https：//register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st10/st10504.en09.pdf Europol (2024). Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2024 (pp. 7-12). Luxembourg： Publications Office of the EU. Federal Bureau of Investigation (2015). Confidential Human Source Program Policy Guide. Washington, D.C.： FBI. Retrieved from https：//www.justice.gov/oip/foia-library/foia-processed/general_topics/ag_guidelines_FBI_human_confidential_sources_2/dl OECD (2012). Transnational Organised Crime and Fragile States (pp. 5-6). Paris： OECD Publishing. Office of the Inspector General (2007). Top Management and Performance Challenges in the Department of Justice： Coordination of Investigations by Department of Justice Violent Crime Task Forces. Washington, D.C.： U.S. Department of Justice. Office of the Inspector General (2011). Law Enforcement Coordination： DOJ Could Improve Its Process for Identifying Disagreements among Agents (GAO-11-314). Washington, D.C.： U.S. Government Accountability Office. Retrieved from https：//www.gao.gov/assets/gao-11-314.pdf The White House (2005). Further Strengthening the Sharing of Terrorism Information to Protect Americans (pp. 1-3). Washington, D.C.： The White House. U.S. Congress, House of Representatives (1997). Investigation of Political Fundraising Improprieties and Possible Violations of Law： Interim Report (105th Congress, House Report 829). Washington, D.C.： U.S. Government Publishing Office. Retrieved May 18, 2025, from https：//www.congress.gov/congressional-report/105th-congress/house-report/829/2 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security. Export Administration Regulations (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774. Retrieved from https：//www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-B/chapter-VII/subchapter-C U.S. Department of State (1997). International Narcotics Control Strategy Report. Washington, D.C.： U.S. Department of State. 四、國際組織文件 Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Recommendation 29： Financial Intelligence Units. Retrieved October 11, 2025, from https：//www.fatf-gafi.org/ INTERPOL. Constitution of the International Criminal Police Organization-INTERPOL, Article 3. INTERPOL. Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, Article 6. Retrieved November 25, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/who-we-are/our-governance/rules-of-procedure United Nations (2000). United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention). New York： United Nations. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2013). Module 8： Law Enforcement Tools and Cooperation - Controlled Delivery. Retrieved 2013, from https：//www.unodc.org/e4j/en/organized-crime/module-8/key-issues/special-investigative-techniques/controlled-deliveries.html United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2022). Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2022. Vienna： UNODC. Retrieved January 2022, from https：//www.un-ilibrary.org/content/books/9789210023351 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2024a). Practical Guide for Controlled Delivery (p. 52). Retrieved from https：//www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/organized_crime/CNA%20Directory/English_ebook.pdf United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2024b). World Wildlife Crime Report 2024. Vienna： UNODC. Retrieved May 8, 2024, from https：//www.unodc.org/cofrb/uploads/documents/ECOS/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2024.pdf 五、法律法規及條約 Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Between the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States. Signed March 26, 2002, entered into force April 4, 2002. Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act (CLOUD Act), H.R. 4943, 115th Cong. (2018). Pub. L. No. 115-141, Div. V, 132 Stat. 348. Public Law 114-139 (2016). Taiwan INTERPOL Observer Status Act. U.S. Congress. Retrieved from https：//www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ139/PLAW-114publ139.pdf United Nations (1988). United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Vienna Convention). Vienna： United Nations. United Nations (2000). United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention). New York： United Nations. 六、美臺協定與備忘錄 American Institute in Taiwan (1992). Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions. Signed October 5, 1992. Retrieved from https：//www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/12/27/00-32936/agreements-in-force-as-of-december-31-1999-between-the-american-institute-in-taiwan-and-the-taipei American Institute in Taiwan (1997). International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) - Taiwan. Retrieved from https：//web-archive-2017.ait.org.tw/en/officialtext-bg9805.html American Institute in Taiwan & Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (2002). Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States. Signed March 26, 2002. 七、法院判決 Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1992). United States v. Microsoft Corp., 584 U.S. (2018). Retrieved September 29, 2025, from https：//supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/584/17-2/ 八、網路資源 American Institute in Taiwan. Taiwan-U.S. Collaboration Leads to Further Breakthrough. Retrieved May 17, 2025, from https：//www.ait.org.tw/ American Institute in Taiwan. The United States and Taiwan Deepen Cross-Border Drug Enforcement Ties with Landmark MOU Signing at 4th Annual Cooperation Forum. Retrieved October 12, 2025, from https：//www.ait.org.tw/the-united-states-and-taiwan-deepen-cross-border-drug-enforcement-ties-with-landmark-mou-signing-at-4th-annual-cooperation-forum/ American Presidency Project (1996). Memorandum on Certification for Major Narcotics Producing and Transit Countries. Retrieved from https：//www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/memorandum-certification-for-major-narcotics-producing-and-transit-countries APEC. Anti-Corruption and Transparency Working Group (ACT-WG). Retrieved January 2025, from https：//www.apec.org/groups/som-steering-committee-on-economic-and-technical-cooperation/working-groups/anti-corruption-and-transparency Arab News (2011). Palestine Granted Observer Status at INTERPOL Meeting. Retrieved from https：//www.arabnews.com/node/390597 Bailey, S. Membership of INTERPOL. Retrieved March 8, 2025, from https：//www.ejiltalk.org/membership-of-interpol/ BBC News (2017, September 27). Palestine Joins Interpol after Vote. Retrieved from https：//www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41413073 Best Practices in Event Deconfliction. National Criminal Intelligence Resource Center. Retrieved May 30, 2025, from https：//ncirc.bja.ojp.gov/event-deconfliction Coleman, D. W. (2012, May 21). Statement before the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, Committee on Homeland Security, U.S. House of Representatives (pp. 2-4). Washington, D.C. Council of Foreign Relations. The Global Regime for Transnational Crime. Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.cfr.org/report/global-regime-transnational-crime Council of the EU (2024). Fight against Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing in the EU. Retrieved May 30, 2024, from https：//www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/fight-against-terrorist-financing/ Coyne, J. Taiwan's Interpol Exclusion Undermines Global Policing Efforts. Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI). Retrieved September 25, 2025, from https：//www.aspistrategist.org.au/taiwans-interpol-exclusion-undermines-global-policing-efforts/ FATF Global Network. Chinese Taipei. Retrieved from https：//www.fatf-gafi.org/content/fatf-gafi/en/countries/detail/Chinese-Taipei.html Global Financial Integrity (GFI). Transnational Crime is a $1.6 trillion to $2.2 trillion Annual "Business". Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//gfintegrity.org/press-release/transnational-crime-is-a-1-6-trillion-to-2-2-trillion-annual-business-finds-new-gfi-report/ IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police). Tenth IACP Asia/Pacific Executive Policing Conference, Taipei, Taiwan. Retrieved October 11, 2025, from https：//www.policechiefmagazine.org/tenth-iacp-asiapacific-executive-policing-conference-taipei-taiwan/ IMF (2023). The Fight Against Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing. Retrieved February 2023, from https：//www.imf.org/en/about/factsheets/sheets/2023/fight-against-money-laundering-and-terrorism-financing INTERPOL. Databases. Retrieved from https：//www.interpol.int/How-we-work/Databases INTERPOL. Member Countries. Retrieved October 3, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/Member-countries INTERPOL. National Central Bureaus (NCBs). Retrieved October 2, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/Member-countries/National-Central-Bureaus-NCBs INTERPOL. Quick Response： INTERPOL Incident Response Team. Retrieved October 3, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/ Lio, P. L. (2016, October 28). Interpols is Not Complete Without Taiwan's Participation. Island Times. Retrieved October 28, 2016, from https：//islandtimes.org/interpols-is-not-complete-without-taiwans-participation/ NCMEC. CyberTipline. Retrieved October 11, 2025, from https：//www.missingkids.org/gethelpnow/cybertipline OCCRP. NGO： Transnational Organized Crime Groups Make US$ 2.2 trillion a Year. Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.occrp.org/en/news/ngo-transnational-organized-crime-groups-make-us-22-trillion-a-year United Nations. United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.unodc.org/ United Nations. What is Transnational Organized Crime? Retrieved November 13, 2024, from https：//www.un.org/en/peace-and-security/transnational-crime U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Stop Ransomware： Black Basta (AA24-131A). Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa24-131a U.S. Postal Service. Tracking Tool. Retrieved from https：//tools.usps.com/go/TrackAction 描述 碩士
國立政治大學
外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班
108922009資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108922009 資料類型 thesis dc.contributor.advisor 蔡沛倫 zh_TW dc.contributor.advisor Tsai, Pei-Lun en_US dc.contributor.author (Authors) 柯智堯 zh_TW dc.contributor.author (Authors) Ke, Chih-Yao en_US dc.creator (作者) 柯智堯 zh_TW dc.creator (作者) Ke, Chih-Yao en_US dc.date (日期) 2026 en_US dc.date.accessioned 2-Mar-2026 13:24:45 (UTC+8) - dc.date.available 2-Mar-2026 13:24:45 (UTC+8) - dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Mar-2026 13:24:45 (UTC+8) - dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0108922009 en_US dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/161913 - dc.description (描述) 碩士 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 外交學系戰略與國際事務碩士在職專班 zh_TW dc.description (描述) 108922009 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) 我國自1984年退出國際刑警組織後，在跨境犯罪偵查與國際刑事司法合作上面臨結構性限制。然而，面對全球化所帶來的犯罪跨境化趨勢，我國仍需與他國建立有效的司法互助機制。在此背景下，臺美刑事司法合作因雙邊緊密的經貿往來與共同的安全利益，成為我國國際刑事合作的重要典範。本研究以臺美刑事司法互助為個案，探討特殊國際處境下跨境犯罪偵查合作的運作模式、面臨困境與可行策略，期能為我國與其他國家深化司法合作提供參考。 本研究採用質性研究方法，結合文獻分析與個案研究途徑。首先透過歷史文獻回顧我國參與國際刑警組織的歷程及退出後的因應機制；其次，研析臺美不同時期的雙邊刑事司法合作並比較分析臺美兩國在檢警制度、執法文化與司法互助運作上的異同；最後，以三件具代表性的跨境刑事案件（大麻走私案、暗網槍砲案、3D列印槍械案）為例，深入剖析臺美合作的實務運作、證據能力爭議及誘捕偵查的法律界限。 研究發現，臺、美刑事合作呈現「行政先行、司法補強」的雙軌模式，透過警察駐外聯絡官機制與正式司法互助協定的相互配合，有效克服外交限制。然而，本研究亦揭示三項關鍵挑戰：其一，我國缺乏跨機關任務去衝突機制，影響執法協調效率；其二，駐外聯絡官數量與分布不足，限制合作深度；其三，數位鑑識與暗網偵查能力落後，高度依賴外國技術支援。此外，個案分析顯示，美國「犯罪傾向測試」與我國「陷害教唆理論」在誘捕偵查標準上，司法實務對於犯意創生之共同觀點。 本研究的學術貢獻在於首次系統性分析臺美刑事合作在制度面、執行面與技術面的完整樣貌，並透過實務案例深化對跨境誘捕偵查、控制下交付、非正式情資交換等創新合作模式的理論認識。實務貢獻方面，本研究提出建立任務去衝突系統、擴增駐外聯絡官據點、強化數位鑑識能力等具體建議，可作為我國精進國際刑事合作制度之參考，亦為其他面臨類似國際處境之國家或地區提供可資借鏡的經驗。 zh_TW dc.description.abstract (摘要) Since Taiwan’s withdrawal from the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) in 1984, the Republic of China (Taiwan) has confronted structural constraints in cross-border crime investigation and international criminal judicial cooperation. However, in response to the trend of transnational crimes driven by globalization, Taiwan must establish effective judicial mutual assistance mechanisms with other nations. In this context, Taiwan-US criminal judicial cooperation, owing to close bilateral economic ties and shared security interests, has become a significant model for Taiwan’s international criminal cooperation. This study takes Taiwan-US criminal mutual legal assistance as a case study to explore the operational models, challenges, and feasible strategies for cross-border crime investigation cooperation under Taiwan’s unique international standing, aiming to provide reference for deepening judicial cooperation between Taiwan and other countries. This research employs qualitative research methods, combining documentary analysis and case study approaches. First, it reviews Taiwan’s participation in and later exit from INTERPOL and examines the responses developed after withdrawal. Second, it provides an overview of Taiwan-United States cooperation in criminal matters at different periods of time and conducts a comparative analysis of the similarities and differences between Taiwan and the United States in their prosecutorial and police systems, law enforcement cultures, and judicial mutual assistance operations. Finally, using three prominent cross-border criminal cases (marijuana trafficking, darknet firearms, and 3D-printed firearms) as examples, it provides an in-depth analysis of the practical operations of Taiwan-US cooperation, evidentiary admissibility disputes, and the legal boundaries of entrapment investigation. The research reveals that Taiwan-US cooperation in criminal matters exhibits a dual-track model with administrative channels as the initial tool and judicial cooperation as supplementary means, effectively overcoming diplomatic limitations through coordination of overseas police liaison officer mechanisms and formal judicial mutual assistance agreements. However, this study also identifies three critical challenges: first, Taiwan lacks an inter-agency task deconfliction mechanism, affecting law enforcement coordination efficiency; second, the number and coverage of overseas liaison officers are insufficient, limiting the depth of cooperation; third, digital forensics and darknet investigation capabilities lag behind, resulting in high dependence on foreign technical support. Furthermore, case analysis demonstrates that while the US “predisposition test” and Taiwan’s “entrapment by estoppel theory” differ in their standards for entrapment investigation, judicial practice in both jurisdictions shares common perspectives regarding the generation of criminal intent. The academic contribution of this study lies in providing the first systematic analysis of the complete picture of Taiwan-US criminal cooperation across institutional, operational, and technical dimensions, deepening theoretical understanding of innovative cooperation models such as cross-border entrapment investigation, controlled delivery, and informal intelligence exchange through practical cases. In terms of practical contributions, this research proposes specific recommendations including establishing a task deconfliction system, expanding overseas liaison officer positions, and strengthening digital forensics capabilities, which can serve as a reference for Taiwan to refine its international criminal cooperation mechanisms and provide valuable experience for other countries or regions facing similar international circumstances. en_US dc.description.tableofcontents 第一章 緒論 第一節 研究動機及目的 1 第二節 文獻回顧與探討 4 第三節 研究方法與研究架構 10 第四節 研究範圍與研究限制 11 第二章 跨境犯罪的挑戰與國際間刑事合作 第一節 跨境犯罪的特性與挑戰 15 第二節 國際間刑事司法合作態樣 17 第三節 打擊跨境犯罪面臨的挑戰 22 第四節 小結 24 第三章 我國刑事司法合作之回顧與制度架構、實務運作 第一節 我國參與國際刑警組織之回顧 26 第二節 我國爭取國際合作之應變機制 32 第三節 國內法制及機關 47 第四節 小結 54 第四章 臺美跨境偵查機關比較研究與實務分析 第一節 臺美跨境犯罪偵查合作歷史 52 第二節 臺、美檢警制度與偵查主體差異 62 第三節 偵查與合作思維異同分析－以美國Event Deconfliction為例 65 第四節 有關臺、美刑事案件合作實務案例分析 72 第五節 小結 85 第五章 結論 87 參考文獻 95 zh_TW dc.format.extent 1065419 bytes - dc.format.mimetype application/pdf - dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0108922009 en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) 跨境犯罪偵查 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 刑事司法互助 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 臺美刑事互助 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 誘捕偵查 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) 駐外聯絡官 zh_TW dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cooperation in criminal matters en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Cross-border crime investigation en_US dc.subject (關鍵詞) Taiwan-U.S. mutual legal assistance in criminal matters en_US dc.title (題名) 跨境犯罪與刑事互助研究 - 以臺美合作實務為例 zh_TW dc.title (題名) Cross-Border Crimes and Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters: Case Study on the Taiwan-United States Cooperation Practices en_US dc.type (資料類型) thesis en_US dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 壹、中文部分 一、書籍 內政部警政署(1983)。《我國參加國際刑警組織始末暨中華民國中央局工作概況》。臺北：內政部警政署。 丘宏達(2006)。《現代國際法》(二版)。臺北：三民書局。 吳和堂(2021)。《教育論文寫作與實用技巧》。臺北：高等教育文化事業有限公司。 孫正華(2007)。《兩岸司法互助之研究——以臺灣對大陸地區法院裁判之認可與執行為主》。國立臺灣大學國家發展研究所博士論文,未出版,臺北。 張紹勳(2004)。《研究方法》。臺中：滄海書局。 許介鱗(2004)。《戰後臺灣史記》。臺北：前衛出版社。 陳翠蓮(2018)。《重探戰後臺灣政治史：美國、國民黨政府與臺灣社會的三方角力》。臺北：春山出版。 郝柏村(1995)。《郝總長日記中的經國先生晚年》。臺北：天下文化。 二、期刊論文 王雪、潘曉龍(2020)。〈電信詐騙犯罪案件研究——以網絡「殺豬盤」為例〉。《法制博覽》,13期,頁17-21。 宋耀明(2019)。〈臺美刑事司法互助協定之簽訂與實踐〉。《司法官學院犯罪防治研究中心——刑事政策與犯罪研究論文集》,頁1-15。 孟維德(2016)。〈防治跨國犯罪的挑戰與克服關鍵〉。《刑事政策與犯罪防治研究專刊》,頁1-20。 孟維德(2017a)。〈國際情資交換與跨國犯罪偵防〉。《中央警察大學學報》,69期,頁5-6。 孟維德(2017b)。〈駐外國及國際組織執法聯絡官之分析與比較〉。《刑事政策與犯罪防治研究專刊》,第14期,頁38-39。 林筱涵(2008)。〈預約法律性質之研究——以我國實務見解為中心〉。《司法新聲》,48期,頁678-700。 柯慶忠(2004)。〈我國在國際刑警組織的回顧與展望〉。《警學叢刊》,第35卷第3期,頁209-210。 馬躍中（2013）。從罪贓移交看兩岸司法互助問題。法務部調查局展望與探索月刊,第11卷第7期,頁25-27。 黃彥仲(2021)。〈當前我國駐外警察聯絡官職責內涵與跨境執法困境之探究〉。《中央警察大學警學叢刊》,第52卷第2期,頁42-70。 黃振倫、廖倪凰(2019)。〈檢察官偵辦跨國詐欺集團之挑戰〉。《臺灣國際法學刊》,第15卷第2期,頁85-94。 廖宗聖、林燦璋(2011)。〈主權觀念轉變下的刑事司法互助模式之探討〉。《國立中正大學法學集刊》,第35期,頁1-45。 慶啟人(2003a)。〈臺美刑事司法互助協定執行一年之回顧與展望〉。《法學叢刊》,第48卷第4期,頁135-150。 慶啟人(2003b)。〈評中共加入「聯合國打擊跨國有組織犯罪公約」對臺灣之影響〉。《展望與探索月刊》,第1卷第12期,頁97-110。 謝立功(2002)。〈我國警察組織之國際合作現況：正式與非正式的互動剖析〉。《警學叢刊》,第14期,頁45-68。 三、研究報告 內政部警政署(2018-2023)。《警政工作年報》。臺北：內政部警政署。 內政部警政署(2025)。《立法院第11屆第2會期外交及國防委員會、司法及法制委員會第1次聯席會議書面報告》,中華民國113年12月26日。 白維棋(2018)。《日本藥物犯罪取締研討會出國報告》,刊登日期：2018年9月25日。檢自：https：//report.ndc.gov.tw/ReportFront/PageSystem/reportFileDownload/C11100356/001 李雅村(2024)。《國際警察打擊跨境犯罪機制之法制研究》。臺北：立法院法制局專題研究報告。 四、法律判決 最高法院111年度臺上字第2667號刑事判決。 最高法院113年度臺上字第5098號刑事判決。 最高法院114年度臺上字第2480號刑事判決。 臺灣高等法院91年度上更(二)字第905號刑事判決。 臺灣高雄地方法院89年度訴字第323號刑事判決。 臺灣臺北地方法院112年度重訴字第19號刑事判決。 五、網際網路 內政部移民署，上網日期：2026年1月12日，檢自：https://www.immigration.gov.tw/5385/5388/7181/7208/ 中華民國外交部(2024)。〈國際刑警組織納入臺灣可以強化全球安全〉。上網日期：2024年10月31日。檢自：https：//www.taiwanembassy.org/cayyz/post/13677.html 中華民國外交部(2025)。〈臺美防制人口走私販運合作〉。上網日期：2025年10月12日。檢自：https：//www.mofa.gov.tw/News_Content.aspx?n=95&s=66211 中華民國行政院(2022)。〈國際合作與參與〉。上網日期：2022年8月15日。檢自： https：//www.ey.gov.tw/Page/4262CB32EEC7470B/104b00e1-7b17-4fab-a991-414949c66922 中華民國檢察官協會(2025)。官方網站。上網日期：2025年10月11日。檢自：http：//www.prosecutors.org.tw/NewsContent.aspx?id=123&type=1 周峻佑(2024)。〈英國倫敦醫院因服務供應商遭網路攻擊而中斷部分服務〉。iThome。上網日期：2025年9月28日。檢自：https：//www.ithome.com.tw/news/163329 法務部調查局，上網日期：2026年1月12日，檢自：https://www.mjib.gov.tw/EditPage/?PageID=d9a8bab0-889d-4b28-8750-5670d2d15484 法務部(2025a)。〈地檢署基層檢察官如何「升官」?淺談「主任檢察官」的角色功能與產生方式〉。上網日期：2025年1月13日。檢自：https：//www.tpc.moj.gov.tw/292885/976681/661783/1249979/post 法務部(2025b)。〈國際及兩岸司法互助〉。上網日期：2025年10月10日。檢自：https：//www.moj.gov.tw/2204/2205/2263/109335/109336/109341/109716/post 法務部所屬機關(2018)。〈Our Country Becomes a Member of the Asset Recovery Inter-Agency Network of Asia/Pacific (ARIN-AP)〉。上網日期：2018年12月28日。檢自：https：//www.ksw.moj.gov.tw/14348/14394/16607/171546/ 法務部國際及兩岸法律司(2024)。〈司法互助記者會彰顯臺美司法互助里程碑〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.moj.gov.tw/2204/2795/2796/221454/post 法務部調查局(2024)。〈法務部調查局偵辦重大電信詐欺案件暨臺美合作破獲跨境機房成果記者會〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.mjib.gov.tw/news/Details/1/1024 法務部調查局(2025a)。〈國際合作「艾格蒙聯盟 Egmont Group of Financial Intelligence Units」〉。上網日期：2025年4月19日。檢自：https：//www.mjib.gov.tw/EditPage/?PageID=3d436d3b-b3e0-4374-8834-1f1fc06faee7 法務部調查局(2025b)。〈國際合作機制〉。上網日期：2024年4月25日。檢自：https：//www.mjib.gov.tw/EditPage/?PageID=f99f1229-57ea-47bc-a389-0fb173c1ac5f 法務部廉政署(2022)。〈亞太經濟合作(APEC)反貪腐暨透明化工作小組〉。刊登日期：2022年8月16日。檢自：https：//www.aac.moj.gov.tw/6398/6518/1170119/1170121/Lpsimplelist 海洋委員會(2021)。〈臺美海巡工作小組瞭解備忘錄〉。上網日期：2025年10月12日。檢自：https：//www.oac.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=44&parentpath=0,4&mcustomize=onemessages_view.jsp&dataserno=202104260001 張銘坤(2022)。〈華裔美男涉強盜加密貨幣潛逃來臺 臺美攜手緝獲〉。中央通訊社。上網日期：2022年6月6日。檢自：https：//www.cna.com.tw/news/asoc/202206060080.aspx 陳韻聿(2024)。〈國際刑警組織為政治犧牲專業未納臺灣 中國緊箍咒無解?〉。中央通訊社。上網日期：2025年3月9日。檢自：https：//www.cna.com.tw/news/asoc/202411080015.aspx 資策會科技法律研究所(2018)。〈美國《雲端法》解析〉。上網日期：2025年10月12日。檢自：https：//stli.iii.org.tw/article-detail.aspx?no=55&tp=1&d=8291 臺灣臺中地方檢察署(2025)。〈中檢偵破臺美跨境詐欺洗錢案成果記者會〉。上網日期：2025年5月14日。檢自：https：//www.tcc.moj.gov.tw/295804/295830/657577/1287270/post 警察廣播電臺新聞科(2025)。〈刑事局破獲幫派走私1.2噸大麻市價逾18億 臺美聯手逮5人〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.pbs.npa.gov.tw/ch/app/data/view?module=wg183&id=18740 刑事警察局公共關係室(2025)。〈跨海追緝!臺美聯手破獲制式槍枝走私案 首度赴美取回關鍵證物〉。上網日期：2025年1月7日。檢自：https：//www.cib.npa.gov.tw/ch/app/news/view?module=news&id=1885 貳、英文部分 一、書籍 Albanese, J. (2015). Organized Crime： From the Mob to Transnational Organized Crime. New York： Routledge. Bossard, A. (1990). Transnational Crime and Criminal Law. Chicago： University of Chicago, Office of International Criminal Justice. Bowling, B., & Sheptycki, J. (2012). Global Policing. London： SAGE Publications. Carter, D. L. (2005). Law Enforcement Intelligence： A Guide for State, Local, and Tribal Law Enforcement Agencies (pp. 183-185). Washington, D.C.： U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services. Retrieved March 29, 2006, from https：//cops.usdoj.gov/pdf/e09042536.pdf Neubauer, D. W., & Fradella, H. F. (2018). America's Courts and the Criminal Justice System (13th ed., pp. 209-211). Boston： Cengage Learning. Peak, K. J. (2020). Justice Administration： Police, Courts, and Corrections Management (9th ed., p. 78). New York： Pearson Education. Shaw, M. N. (2008). International Law (6th ed.). Cambridge： Cambridge University Press. 二、期刊論文 Eberlein, B. (2019). Who Fills the Global Governance Gap? Rethinking the Roles of Business and Government in Global Governance. Organization Studies, 40(3), 393-420. Morse, J. C., & Keohane, R. O. (2014). Contested Multilateralism. The Review of International Organizations, 9(4), 385-412. Sheptycki, J. W. E. (1995). Transnational Policing and the Makings of a Postmodern State. British Journal of Criminology, 35(4), 613-635. 三、政府文件及官方報告 Clayton County Police Department (2020). Standard Operating Procedures (pp. 1-3). Clayton County： Clayton County Police Department. Council of the EU (2025). Organised Crime： A Growing Threat to Democracy (p. 2). Brussels： General Secretariat of the Council. Council of the European Union (2009). Secondment of Liaison Officers and Cooperation of Liaison Officers Posted Abroad (10504/09, pp. 3-6). Brussels： Council Secretariat. Retrieved from https：//register.consilium.europa.eu/pdf/en/09/st10/st10504.en09.pdf Europol (2024). Internet Organised Crime Threat Assessment (IOCTA) 2024 (pp. 7-12). Luxembourg： Publications Office of the EU. Federal Bureau of Investigation (2015). Confidential Human Source Program Policy Guide. Washington, D.C.： FBI. Retrieved from https：//www.justice.gov/oip/foia-library/foia-processed/general_topics/ag_guidelines_FBI_human_confidential_sources_2/dl OECD (2012). Transnational Organised Crime and Fragile States (pp. 5-6). Paris： OECD Publishing. Office of the Inspector General (2007). Top Management and Performance Challenges in the Department of Justice： Coordination of Investigations by Department of Justice Violent Crime Task Forces. Washington, D.C.： U.S. Department of Justice. Office of the Inspector General (2011). Law Enforcement Coordination： DOJ Could Improve Its Process for Identifying Disagreements among Agents (GAO-11-314). Washington, D.C.： U.S. Government Accountability Office. Retrieved from https：//www.gao.gov/assets/gao-11-314.pdf The White House (2005). Further Strengthening the Sharing of Terrorism Information to Protect Americans (pp. 1-3). Washington, D.C.： The White House. U.S. Congress, House of Representatives (1997). Investigation of Political Fundraising Improprieties and Possible Violations of Law： Interim Report (105th Congress, House Report 829). Washington, D.C.： U.S. Government Publishing Office. Retrieved May 18, 2025, from https：//www.congress.gov/congressional-report/105th-congress/house-report/829/2 U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security. Export Administration Regulations (EAR), 15 CFR Parts 730-774. Retrieved from https：//www.ecfr.gov/current/title-15/subtitle-B/chapter-VII/subchapter-C U.S. Department of State (1997). International Narcotics Control Strategy Report. Washington, D.C.： U.S. Department of State. 四、國際組織文件 Financial Action Task Force (FATF). Recommendation 29： Financial Intelligence Units. Retrieved October 11, 2025, from https：//www.fatf-gafi.org/ INTERPOL. Constitution of the International Criminal Police Organization-INTERPOL, Article 3. INTERPOL. Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, Article 6. Retrieved November 25, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/who-we-are/our-governance/rules-of-procedure United Nations (2000). United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention). New York： United Nations. United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2013). Module 8： Law Enforcement Tools and Cooperation - Controlled Delivery. Retrieved 2013, from https：//www.unodc.org/e4j/en/organized-crime/module-8/key-issues/special-investigative-techniques/controlled-deliveries.html United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2022). Global Report on Trafficking in Persons 2022. Vienna： UNODC. Retrieved January 2022, from https：//www.un-ilibrary.org/content/books/9789210023351 United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2024a). Practical Guide for Controlled Delivery (p. 52). Retrieved from https：//www.unodc.org/documents/treaties/organized_crime/CNA%20Directory/English_ebook.pdf United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) (2024b). World Wildlife Crime Report 2024. Vienna： UNODC. Retrieved May 8, 2024, from https：//www.unodc.org/cofrb/uploads/documents/ECOS/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2024.pdf 五、法律法規及條約 Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Between the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States. Signed March 26, 2002, entered into force April 4, 2002. Clarifying Lawful Overseas Use of Data Act (CLOUD Act), H.R. 4943, 115th Cong. (2018). Pub. L. No. 115-141, Div. V, 132 Stat. 348. Public Law 114-139 (2016). Taiwan INTERPOL Observer Status Act. U.S. Congress. Retrieved from https：//www.congress.gov/114/plaws/publ139/PLAW-114publ139.pdf United Nations (1988). United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (Vienna Convention). Vienna： United Nations. United Nations (2000). United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (Palermo Convention). New York： United Nations. 六、美臺協定與備忘錄 American Institute in Taiwan (1992). Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation in the Field of Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions. Signed October 5, 1992. Retrieved from https：//www.federalregister.gov/documents/2000/12/27/00-32936/agreements-in-force-as-of-december-31-1999-between-the-american-institute-in-taiwan-and-the-taipei American Institute in Taiwan (1997). International Narcotics Control Strategy Report (INCSR) - Taiwan. Retrieved from https：//web-archive-2017.ait.org.tw/en/officialtext-bg9805.html American Institute in Taiwan & Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office (2002). Agreement on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters between the American Institute in Taiwan and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States. Signed March 26, 2002. 七、法院判決 Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1992). United States v. Microsoft Corp., 584 U.S. (2018). Retrieved September 29, 2025, from https：//supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/584/17-2/ 八、網路資源 American Institute in Taiwan. Taiwan-U.S. Collaboration Leads to Further Breakthrough. Retrieved May 17, 2025, from https：//www.ait.org.tw/ American Institute in Taiwan. The United States and Taiwan Deepen Cross-Border Drug Enforcement Ties with Landmark MOU Signing at 4th Annual Cooperation Forum. Retrieved October 12, 2025, from https：//www.ait.org.tw/the-united-states-and-taiwan-deepen-cross-border-drug-enforcement-ties-with-landmark-mou-signing-at-4th-annual-cooperation-forum/ American Presidency Project (1996). Memorandum on Certification for Major Narcotics Producing and Transit Countries. Retrieved from https：//www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/memorandum-certification-for-major-narcotics-producing-and-transit-countries APEC. Anti-Corruption and Transparency Working Group (ACT-WG). Retrieved January 2025, from https：//www.apec.org/groups/som-steering-committee-on-economic-and-technical-cooperation/working-groups/anti-corruption-and-transparency Arab News (2011). Palestine Granted Observer Status at INTERPOL Meeting. Retrieved from https：//www.arabnews.com/node/390597 Bailey, S. Membership of INTERPOL. Retrieved March 8, 2025, from https：//www.ejiltalk.org/membership-of-interpol/ BBC News (2017, September 27). Palestine Joins Interpol after Vote. Retrieved from https：//www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-41413073 Best Practices in Event Deconfliction. National Criminal Intelligence Resource Center. Retrieved May 30, 2025, from https：//ncirc.bja.ojp.gov/event-deconfliction Coleman, D. W. (2012, May 21). Statement before the Subcommittee on Border and Maritime Security, Committee on Homeland Security, U.S. House of Representatives (pp. 2-4). Washington, D.C. Council of Foreign Relations. The Global Regime for Transnational Crime. Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.cfr.org/report/global-regime-transnational-crime Council of the EU (2024). Fight against Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing in the EU. Retrieved May 30, 2024, from https：//www.consilium.europa.eu/en/policies/fight-against-terrorist-financing/ Coyne, J. Taiwan's Interpol Exclusion Undermines Global Policing Efforts. Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI). Retrieved September 25, 2025, from https：//www.aspistrategist.org.au/taiwans-interpol-exclusion-undermines-global-policing-efforts/ FATF Global Network. Chinese Taipei. Retrieved from https：//www.fatf-gafi.org/content/fatf-gafi/en/countries/detail/Chinese-Taipei.html Global Financial Integrity (GFI). Transnational Crime is a $1.6 trillion to $2.2 trillion Annual "Business". Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//gfintegrity.org/press-release/transnational-crime-is-a-1-6-trillion-to-2-2-trillion-annual-business-finds-new-gfi-report/ IACP (International Association of Chiefs of Police). Tenth IACP Asia/Pacific Executive Policing Conference, Taipei, Taiwan. Retrieved October 11, 2025, from https：//www.policechiefmagazine.org/tenth-iacp-asiapacific-executive-policing-conference-taipei-taiwan/ IMF (2023). The Fight Against Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing. Retrieved February 2023, from https：//www.imf.org/en/about/factsheets/sheets/2023/fight-against-money-laundering-and-terrorism-financing INTERPOL. Databases. Retrieved from https：//www.interpol.int/How-we-work/Databases INTERPOL. Member Countries. Retrieved October 3, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/Member-countries INTERPOL. National Central Bureaus (NCBs). Retrieved October 2, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/Member-countries/National-Central-Bureaus-NCBs INTERPOL. Quick Response： INTERPOL Incident Response Team. Retrieved October 3, 2025, from https：//www.interpol.int/ Lio, P. L. (2016, October 28). Interpols is Not Complete Without Taiwan's Participation. Island Times. Retrieved October 28, 2016, from https：//islandtimes.org/interpols-is-not-complete-without-taiwans-participation/ NCMEC. CyberTipline. Retrieved October 11, 2025, from https：//www.missingkids.org/gethelpnow/cybertipline OCCRP. NGO： Transnational Organized Crime Groups Make US$ 2.2 trillion a Year. Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.occrp.org/en/news/ngo-transnational-organized-crime-groups-make-us-22-trillion-a-year United Nations. United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.unodc.org/ United Nations. What is Transnational Organized Crime? Retrieved November 13, 2024, from https：//www.un.org/en/peace-and-security/transnational-crime U.S. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA). Stop Ransomware： Black Basta (AA24-131A). Retrieved September 28, 2025, from https：//www.cisa.gov/news-events/cybersecurity-advisories/aa24-131a U.S. Postal Service. Tracking Tool. Retrieved from https：//tools.usps.com/go/TrackAction zh_TW
