| dc.contributor | 國立政治大學法律學系 | en_US |
| dc.contributor | 行政院國家科學委員會 | en_US |
| dc.creator (作者) | 何賴傑 | zh_TW |
| dc.date (日期) | 2010 | en_US |
| dc.date.accessioned | 26-十一月-2012 09:37:28 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 26-十一月-2012 09:37:28 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 26-十一月-2012 09:37:28 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/55898 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 本計畫目的在研究偵查中強制辯護制度之學理及於我國之具體實踐。我國刑事訴訟法一開始對於強制辯護即有明文規定，不過，只限於審判階段始能使用，反而常易發生侵害犯罪嫌疑人利益之偵查階段，卻無法適用。反觀國外情形（例如德國、美國、日本等國），原則上於偵查階段也能適用強制辯護。我國刑事訴訟法直到2006年5月24日始增訂第三十一條第五項規定，正式將強制辯護制度延伸到偵查階段予以適用。不過，該項規定只限於對智能障礙無法為完全陳述之被告始能適用，且係由檢察官義務指定。如依本規定內容形式觀之，顯然與刑事訴訟法第31條第1項前段第3選項1，被告因智能障礙無法為完全陳述，於審判中未經選任辯護人者，審判長應指定辯護人為其辯護之規定並無二致。觀其立法意旨，兩者亦皆在保障智能障礙被告之防禦權。2不過，偵查中強制辯護，無論在學理上或在具體實踐上，都將造成程序上重大影響，因而有仔細探究之必要。本計畫第一部份將以德國刑事訴訟法關於偵查中必要辯護規定及學理討論為出發點，冀圖為我國新修規定之具體適用提供參考。計畫第二部份，在具體實踐上，我國與德國存有甚大差異，因而必須深入分析我國對此之具體實踐情形，始能深知究竟如此規範是否真能發揮保障弱勢被告辯護權之功能。特別是我國強制辯護制度係透過法律扶助基金會所屬之法扶律師充當指定之辯護人，此在偵查階段亦無不同。不過，畢竟審判階段與偵查階段對此之規定仍有不同，因而於具體實踐上亦會產生不同，但究竟如何不同，仍有待分析討論。 | en_US |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The Object of the project is researching the theory and the practice of the compulsory defense at the investigation stage. The compulsory defense is provided expressly in The Criminal Procedural Act of Taiwan, but it is limited to trial stage. On the contrary, the compulsory defense is applied in the investigation stage in others jurisdiction (Ex: Germany, American, and Japan). Until May 24, 2006, the Criminal Procedural Act of Taiwan enacted §31 V to extend the compulsory defense to the investigation stage. However, the article only applies to the defendants who are mentally disabled and unable to be interrogated, and the lawyer must be appointed by public prosecutor. Furthermore, §31 V and §31 I both protect the defense right of mentally disabled defendant. Because the compulsory defense at the investigation stage will result in significant influence on the proceeding, it is necessary to research it. The starting viewpoint of the project is the theory and the practice of the compulsory defense at the investigation stage in the Criminal Procedural Act of Germany, and then provides a suggestion to the application of our new provision. The practice between Germany and Taiwan is very different; therefore, we need to in-depth analyze our practice so that can realize whether the provision would function. In particular, the compulsory defense in Taiwan is through the Legal Aid Foundation to assign the lawyer, which is no difference at the investigation stage from the trial stage. However, there are discrepancies between the trial and the investigation stage which could lead to different application. And what the discrepancies exactly are, need still to analyze and discuss in this project. | en_US |
| dc.language.iso | en_US | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 基礎研究 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 學術補助 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 研究期間:9908~ 10007 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 研究經費:248仟元 | en_US |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 行政院國家科學委員會 | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 計畫編號NSC99-2410-H004-160 | - |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 偵查程序強制辯護;自主原則;對質詰問權;歐洲人權公約無償義務辯護;證據評價解決法;自由心証;證據禁止;權衡原則;規範保護目的理論;智能障礙被告;陳述;法定障礙事由 | en_US |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Compulsory Defense at the investigation stage; Autonomous Principle; Right to Cross Examination; Free Compulsory Defense; Exclusionary Rule; Handicapped Defendant; Statement | en_US |
| dc.title (題名) | 偵查中強制辯護之理念與實踐 | zh_TW |
| dc.title.alternative (其他題名) | Theory and Practice on Obligatiive Defence in Inverstigation | en_US |
| dc.type (資料類型) | report | en |
