美國死刑爭議與美國例外主義－由Zimring、Whitman和Garland之學說出發

Abstract

死刑不但是一個生死攸關的問題，更是一個令人縈繞於心而猶難解決的疑問。死刑議題的歷久彌新在於，死刑制度的存廢與否並非單純的是非選擇，一個國家是否適用死刑制度不僅僅是法律制度的抉擇，更涉及了文化、道德、倫理、宗教、人權與正義的諸多價值考量。在全世界吹起一陣廢除死刑風潮的21世紀，死刑制度在國際間已被提升為觀察一個國家人權發展的重要指標。儘管如此，死刑卻仍然事實上存在並持續被適用，其中又以美國對死刑的態度最受爭議。當文明經濟發展程度與美國相當之歐洲國家皆紛紛放棄死刑制度之適用，並將死刑視為對人權與公民尊嚴之重大侵害時，美國卻還是堅持保留死刑制度作為其國內刑罰制裁的手段，並且持續對死刑犯為死刑處決。如何解釋在這個廢止死刑制度潮流的年代中美國獨排眾議的行為，已成為近代刑罰學與社會學家觀察研究之重點。 本文將美國仍持續適用死刑制度之爭議作為討論主軸，分別從歷史觀察、判決發展與學理分析三個面向作檢驗，並以學者分析闡釋的相關理論及批評為論述重心。藉由觀察死刑在美國歷史與判決實務上的相關發展，去理解美國社會與死刑之間的內在情感連結，再透過外部的學理討論，以重新建立研究美國死刑制度之架構，試圖為美國死刑之未來尋找一個新的方向與轉機。本文以「美國例外主義」下，刑事學家Franklin E. Zimring發展出的「私人復仇主義」理論，與James Q. Whitman的「尊嚴與地位意識」理論作為研究主軸，並藉由刑罰學家David Garland對於「美國例外主義」之批判，及其所提出之歷史脈絡觀察的研究架構，分析歸納各該理論之內涵與優缺點。最後在結論中，試圖提出個人之意見，以為美國持續適用死刑的特殊性提供一個更貼近於事實的分析角度。

Death penalty is not only a matter of life and death, but a lingering doubt when it comes to every country’s penal system. A glance back at the history of social development reveals that the subtlety of death penalty is in its complications, which involves all kinds of given perspectives, such as the matter of culture, moral, ethic, religion, human rights, and even the concept of justice. In 21th century, when the world came to an age of abolition of the use of death, it is a confusing yet disturbing issue that United States, where capital punishment and its penal system being as a peculiar institution, not only not abstain from the death penalty, executions happens continually and steadily. In regard to analyze the justification of why American seems to walk strongly on the road against all the others, there is the theory called “American Exceptionalism” taken from sociology terms to describe the vibe. Based on the ideal of culture essence, penologists developed more theories on the issue following “American Exceptionalism”. The most two important ones would be the theory of “Vigilante Value”, created by Franklin E. Zimring, and the theory of “Two-Status System” and “Degradation”, cultivated by James Q. Whitman. However, criminologist David Garland noticed the shortages of cultural essentialism, thus providing a wilder historical view to build a new dissecting structure. While there are certainly valid arguments to the contrary, the ultimate goal of this thesis is trying to find balances between objective and subjective analysis perspectives, by integrating theories of Franklin E. Zimring, James Q. Whitman and David Garland, can a new point of view be framed to find directions and predict whether a turning point is around the corner for the future of American’s death penalty.