我國建立量刑準則之研究 -以英格蘭與威爾斯、蘇格蘭量刑準則為借鏡

Abstract

我國現行司法實務並不要求法官公開量刑過程，以至於當事人及一般民眾無法客觀地檢視法官所裁量之刑罰是否適當，對民眾而言，法官的「自由心證」為量刑之唯一理由，此為嚴重影響司法信賴度的最主要原因之一。因此我國如何建立可遵循的量刑標準，透過參考外國立法例，改善目前實務運作狀況，經由公開透明的量刑機制，重建人民對司法的信賴，為我國目前司法機關最重要的課題。 本論文旨在借鏡英國量刑準則建立之經驗為我國之參考，主要的核心內容係介紹英格蘭與威爾斯、蘇格蘭之量刑法制，有關其量刑法制之演進、發展歷程及實務運作狀況，包括量刑委員會之成立及運作機制，暨量刑準則之訂定過程及適用情形，提供其各種相關資訊。期本研究能予我國在如何訂定符合我國國情與訴訟制度的量刑標準，提供建設性之參考。 研究結論為：一、我國應透過制定具法律拘束力之量刑準則，建構透明的量刑機制，改善量刑歧異現象及減低量刑過輕疑慮。二、透過立法授權建立具獨立性之量刑委員會，使我國在建立拘束力之量刑準則有所依據及基礎，並進行常態性及持續性之量刑改革。三、研議增設量刑前報告機制，充實量刑前調查，作為建立及適用量刑準則之前提。四、轉型量刑資訊系統，成立AI司法資訊研析部門。五、法官應進行常態性的量刑職務訓練與進修。

The current criminal justice practice in Taiwan does not require judges to disclose the sentencing process, so that the parties and the general public cannot objectively check whether the sentencing by the judges are just. For the public, the judges’ “free judicial discretion” is the only reason of sentencing. This is one of the most important reasons that seriously affect the judicial credibility. Therefore, how to establish sentencing guidelines in Taiwan to improve sentencing practice, by referring to foreign legislation, and to construct an open and transparent sentencing guidelines, so that sentencing can be foreseen, the trust in the judiciary can be rebuild, that is the most important subject to our judiciary. The purpose of this thesis is to use the UK’s experience in establishing sentencing guidelines as a reference for Taiwan. The main content is to introduce the sentencing system in England and Wales, Scotland, focusing on the evolution, development and practical operation of their sentencing systems, including the establishment and operation mechanism of the sentencing council, as well as the setting process and application of sentencing guidelines. The aim of the above introduction is to provide a constructive reference for Taiwan on how to establish the sentencing guidelines adopted to Taiwan’s criminal justice system. The conclusions of this study are as follows: 1. Establish a transparent sentencing mechanism by enacting legal binding sentencing guidelines to avoid the sentencing disparity and reduce doubts about sentencing outcomes. 2. Set up an independent sentencing council through legislative to authorization to establish binding sentencing guidelines, and to carry out sentencing reforms continuously. 3. Establish a pre-sentence investigation report mechanism to provide solid factual basis for judges before applying sentencing guidelines. 4. Transform the existing sentencing information system and set up an AI judicial information research and analysis department. 5. Encourage judges to attend sentencing training programs and receive developments on sentencing trends.