| 研究生: |
蔡崇義 Tsay, Chorng-Yih |
|---|---|
| 論文名稱: |
司法改革九一新制推動成效分析-以臺灣高等法院臺南分院訴訟轄區為例 Evaluation of the Innovatory 91 Judicial Reform Adduction - Taiwan High Court, Tainan BranchCourt of Judicature |
| 指導教授: |
余光華
Yu, Guang-Hua 譚伯群 Tan, Bertram |
| 學位類別: |
碩士 Master |
| 系所名稱: |
管理學院 - 高階管理碩士在職專班(EMBA) Executive Master of Business Administration (EMBA) |
| 論文出版年: | 2005 |
| 畢業學年度: | 93 |
| 語文別: | 中文 |
| 論文頁數: | 154 |
| 中文關鍵詞: | 簡易程序 、簡式審判程序 、認罪協商 、交互詰問 、司法改革 、證據法則 |
| 外文關鍵詞: | Plea bargaining, Simplified trial procedure, Simplification of procedure, The rule of evidence, Judicial reform, Cross examination |
| 相關次數: | 點閱:141 下載:2 |
| 分享至: |
| 查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
司法改革是世界的潮流,不僅法治先進的歐美各國持續司法改革的工程,甚至政教合一的伊斯蘭世界、共產主義的中國大陸,亦興起一股改革司法的呼聲。我國也在88年7月6至8日於國際會議中心召開「全國司法改革會議」,確立改革綱領,民國92年2月6日更大幅度修正刑事訴訟法,將原刑事程序由「職權進行」的制度,變革為傾向「當事人進行」的制度,並於民國92年9月1日開始施行,另配套措施中有關「認罪協商」部分則於民國93年6月23日通過施行。
刑事程序最大的變革在實施「交互詰問」制度,簡式審判程序、簡易程序、加強辯護制度、採行嚴格之證據法則等為配套措施,以求「明案速斷,疑案慎斷」,求取事實發現及人權保障的平衡。唯刑事訴訟新制實施迄今將滿二年,對於司法改革九一新制的推動策略的運用與推動策略之成效、審檢辯三方對於各項配套措施的看法及實施成效及交互詰問對事實發現的成效及審檢辯三方對交互詰問的落實,自有加以探討的必要。因而藉著對於審檢辯實施問卷調查及擷取司法院及法務部的統計資料,以統計方法加以分析,求得對於:(1)刑事訴訟制度改革的實施策略。(2)刑事訴訟九一新制配套措施的成效。(3)交互詰問落實的情形。(4)刑事訴訟九一新制的整體成效。(5)未來推動刑事訴訟金字塔化的建議等結論及建議,冀希藉此實證分析的資料對於刑事新制的推動有所助益。
Judicial and legal reform is now being a trend of the world. Not only do those western countries that have advanced judicial system persist on doing the reform, but also does the religious polity like those of the Muslim countries, or those in the communist regimes like China, exclaim for a reform in their judicial system. In the “National Judicial Reformation Conference”, which was convoked by the Judicial Yuen of the Republic of China and was hold in the International Conference Center on July 6, 1999, the reformation guiding principles were outlined. On February 6, 2003, there came a large-scale revision that transforms the code of criminal procedure from “pro-nonadversary system” to “pro-adversary system”, and was implemented on September 1 the same year. In addition, the supplemental part of the reform related to the「plea bargaining」 was also passed and in effect on June 23, 2004.
The initiation of the “cross examination” sequences is the most dramatic reform in the code of criminal procedure. In conjunction with simplified trial procedure, simplification of procedure, enhancement on the defense system, and the taking of the rule of evidence into practice, the goal that “cases with clear evidences be closed forthrights cases with doubts be judged deliberately” can be accomplished, and the balance between truth finding and human rights protection can be achieved. It has been nearly two years since the implementation of the newly revised criminal procedure law as for to date. I believe it is time to evaluate the performance and effect on the strategy of the “New Judicial Reform”, to exam from the perspectives of the court, the prosecute, and the defendant on the measures of the new system, and to assess the effects and fulfillment of the cross-exam sequences. Therefore, a survey is conducted on three aspects of samplesthe court, the prosecute, and the defendant. Some data are also acquired from the Judicial Yuen and the Ministry of Justice as reference. From our statistics analysis, we obtained a conclusion and suggestion on: (1) implementation strategy for the revised criminal procedure law, (2) effects on the supplemental measures of the New Criminal Court Judicial Reform, (3) implementation on cross exam, (4) accomplishment of the New Criminal Court Judicial Reform as a whole, (5) “pyramidization” for the criminal action in the future. I believe that these results can give an impetus and referral to the refinement of the newly reformed criminal court judicial system.
一、中文部份:
1. Porter(1997),「競爭策略」,台北:天下文化。
2. 王兆鵬、吳從周(2002),「當事人進行主義訴訟制度下法庭活動之研究—以台灣板橋地方法院試行加強當事人進行主義精神」,司法研究年報第二十輯第七篇。
3. 王建仁(2004),「牙醫診所經營績效之探討」,國立成功大學企業管理學系(EMBA)專班碩士論文。
4. 台灣法曹協會、中華民國律師公會全國聯合會、財團法人民間司法改革基金會(2004),「刑訴新制施行滿一週年問卷調查表報告」。
5. 司法院大法官書記處(1993),「考察美、日、馬、泰、新五國憲政制度報告」,司法院。
6. 司法院刑事廳(1999),「全國司法改革會議中有關刑事訴訟制度改革之議題」,律師雜誌第238期,45-72頁。
7. 司法院統計處(2002),「中華民國司法院計名詞定義」,司法院。
8. 巫政松(2002),「交互詰問之研究—以台灣苗栗地方法院實施交互詰問之法庭活動為例」,司法研究年報第二十二輯第十三篇。
9. 李玉惠(2003),「國民中學學校革新的社會動力研究」,國立臺灣師範大學教育研究所博士論文。
10. 李文惠(2001),「資訊科技、知識管理、經營策略、人力資源控制與組織績效關係之研究—以台灣高科技產業為例」,國立成功大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
11. 李金定(2003),「交互詰問之理論與實踐」,國防管理學院法律研究所碩士論文。
12. 李青芬、李雅婷、趙慕芬譯(2001),Robbins, S. T.著,「組織行為學(Organizational behavior)」,臺北:華泰。
13. 吳定(1984),「組織發展-理論與技術」,臺北:天一。
14. 邱義城(1997),「策略聖經」。台北:商業周刊。
15. 林宗志(1999),「交互詢問之研究」,國立中興大學法律系碩士論文。
16. 林春燕(2000),「作業流程管理, 組織結構調整,人力資源運作及組織績效之關聯性研究-以五區國稅局為例」,國立成功大學企業管理學系碩士論文。
17. 林淑娟譯(2000),Michael L. Radelet, Hugo Adam Bedau, Constance E. Putnam著,「雖然他們是無辜的(In Spite of Innocence)」,台北:商周。
18. 柯耀程(2000),「職權進行與當事人進行模式之省思」,台北,學林,158頁。
19. 侯夙芳(1999),「組織發展意涵之探索」,人力發展理論與實務第63期,48-56頁。
20. 唐富藏(1988),「企業政策與策略」,台北:大行。
21. 許士軍(1980),「管理學」,台北:東華。
22. 許建榮(2004),「法庭活動之研究-以台灣花蓮地方法院實施交互詰問法庭活動為例」,國立東華大學公共行政研究所碩士在職專班碩士論文。
23. 陳旺昭(2002),「美國證據法不當詰問之探討」,中央警察大學法律研究所碩士論文。
24. 陳明璋(1979),「組織效能研究途徑及其衡量」,中國行政,第29期,48-71頁。
25. 陳恒寬(2002),「交互詰問制度利弊評析與研究」,司法研究年報第二十二輯第九篇。
26. 陳祐治(2002),「交互詰問之證據法則」,法官協會雜誌,第四卷第一期:62-85頁。
27. 陳盈錦(2001),「法庭活動與交互詰問」,全國律師九月號,39頁。
28. 張特生(1975),「美國司法的革新運動(十五)」,司法通訊第684期第2版。
29. 張特生(1975),「美國司法的革新運動(二一)」,司法通訊第692期第2版。
30. 黃東熊(2003),「刑事訴訟法論」,台北,三民,369頁。
31. 彭朱如(1980),「省立醫院組織文化與生產績效之研究」,中國醫藥學院醫務管理研究所碩士論文。
32. 秦夢群(1998),「教育行政-理論部分」,臺北:五南。
33. 黃清雄(2000),「產業競爭力關鍵因素之研究—以台灣地區鋼線鋼覽業為例」,私立長榮管理學院經研管理研究所碩士論文。
34. 董璠輿、宋英輝譯(1997),土本武司著,「刑事訴訟法要義」,臺北:五南。
35. 薛美娥(2004),「組織變革與組織績效的關聯性-以某公立醫院為例」,雲林科技大學企業管理研究所碩士論文。
二、英文部份:
1. Beckhard, R. (1969), Organization Development : Strategies and Models Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
2. Bullock & Batten (1989), Organization Development and Change, WEST, Minnesota: Thomas, C. G. & Edgar, H.F., Paul S. T.
3. Carroll, S. J., & Schneier, C. E. (1982), Performance appraisal and development of performance in organizations. Glenview Illionis: Scott, Foresman.
4. Chandler, A. D. (1962), “Strategy and Struture”, Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1962.
5. Child, J. (1975), “Organization Structure, Environment and Performance:The Role of Strategic Choice”, Sociology, Vol.6, pp.1-22.
6. Connor, P. E. (1988), Organizational change, New York: Praeger.
7. Cummings, T. G. & House, E. F. (1989). Organization development and change, St. Paul, Minn.: West.
8. Dess, G. C. and R. B. Robinson, Jr. (1984), “Measuring Organizational Performance in the Absence of Objective Measures”, Strategic Management Journal, Vol.5, No.3, pp.265-273.
9. Delaney, J. T. & M. A. Huselid, (1996). “The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Perceptions of Organizational Performance.”, Academy of Management Journal, 39(4): pp.949-969.
10. Edward Philips (1982), Brief Case on Law of Evidenc, Apert, G. P. (eds.).
11. Edward Philips (1989), Criminal Evidence & Procedure, IL.: Waveland.
12. David, Fred R. (1999), Strategic Management, 7th edition, Prentice Hall.
13. French, W. L. & Bell, C. H. (1995), Organization development: Behavioral science interventions for organization improvement, Englewood cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 5th ed.
14. Fried Lander, F. & L. D. Brown (1974), "Organization Development", Review of Psychology.
15. Galbraith , C. & Schendel , D.(1983), “An Empirical Analysis of Strategic Type”, Strategic Management Journal, 4, pp.153-173.
16. Greiner, L. E. (1976), "Patterns of Organization Change", Harvard Business Review, May-June, pp.119.
17. Gruca, T.S., and Nath, D. (1994). The Impact Of Marketing On Hospital Performance. Journal Of Hospital Marketing, pp.316-351.
18. Hanson, E.M. (1991), Educational administration and organizational behavior, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 3rd ed.
19. Hatton ,K.J.,Schendel ,D.E.,and Cooper ,A.C. (1978), "A Strategic Model of the U.S. Brewing Industry.", Academy of Management Journal, pp.592-610.
20. Hitt Gabel (1928), “A simultaneous equation analysis of the structrue and performance of the United States petroleum refining industry”, Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol.28, pp.33-49.
21. Jauch & Glueck. (1989), Strategic Management & Business Policy, 5th Edition, McGraw-Hill.
22. Kast,F.E. (1985), Organization and Management, New York: McGraw- Hill Book Co., 4th ed.
23. Leavitt, H. J. (1965), "Applied Organizational Change in Industry: Structural, Technological and Humanistic Approaches", in Handbook of Organizations, ed. James G. March(Skokie, Ⅲ. : Rand McNally), pp.1144-1168.
24. Lewin, K. (1951), Field theory in social science. New York : Harper & Row.
25. Lippitt, R., Watson, J. & Wesley, B. (1958), Dynamic of planned change, New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
26. Michael, S. (1981), Techniques of organizational change, New York: McGraw-Hill.
27. Mosher, Frederick C. (1967), Governmental Reorganization: Case and Commentary, New York: The Bobbs-Merrill Company.
28. Quinn, J. B. (1980), Strategies for Charge: Logical Incrementalism, Homewood, IL: Irwin.
29. Robbins, S. P. (1990), Organization Theory: Structure, Design, and Application, Englewood Cliffs, New York: Prentice-Hall, 3rd ed.
30. Robinson, R. B & J. A. Pearce (1988), “Planned Patterns of Strategic Behavior and their Relationship to Business Unit Performance”, StrategicMangement Journal, 9, pp.43-60.
31. Roscoe Pound (1914), “Law and Liberty”, in Lectures on The Harvard Classics, Political Science. V. Law and Liberty, ed. William Allan Nelson et al. in The Harvard Classics, ed. Charles W. Eliot, Vol. 51, New York: P. F. Collier and Son, 1909-14.
32. Rue & Holland. (1986), Strategic Management,“The Core Competence of the Corporation,”Harvard Business Review, May/Jun, pp.79-91.
33. Salamon, Lester M. (1981), “Question of Goals”, in Federal Re-organization: What Have We Learned?, Peter Szanton (eds.), NJ: Chatham House Publishers, pp.58-84.
34. Sloma,Richard S. (1980), “How to Measure Managerial performance”, Macmillan P.C, pp.66-89.
35. Szilagyi, A. O. (1981), Management and Performance, California: Goodyear Publishing Company Inc.
36. Wigmore,John H.(revised by Chadbourn,James Hy)(1974), Evidence Volume 5, Canada: Little, Brown & Company.