刑事被告的閱卷權

Abstract

對刑事被告而言，透過閱卷來取得訴訟資訊，是非常重要的。惟閱卷權的主體、行使範圍、限制與救濟到底為何，在我國法上是很模糊的，還有可以討論的空間。本文試以歐洲人權與歐洲人權法院的操作出發，並觀察德國法與之互動後對規範的影響，嘗試找尋閱卷權的操作模式，以供我國立法與實務參考。文中首先整理當前我國學說及實務的發展狀況，並提出問題。其次，介紹歐洲人權公約的規範，以及歐洲人權法院的實踐；並將判決類型化，歸結出歐洲人權法院的操作模式。三者，則介紹德國規範與實務的發展，觀察歐洲人權法院與德國的互動，透過對歐洲人權法院判決的回應，得出德國法上的操作模式。第四，用先前討論的操作方法來解答我國法的問題，嘗試建構閱卷權的內涵，並以現行實務看法作為檢驗，檢討與現行實務可能發生的衝突，提供立法者修法時參考。文末，回顧歐洲人權法院對德國法的影響，並提出對於刑事被告閱卷權的建議。畢竟，我們不知道未來會發生什麼事情，能掌握的就是利用現有的資訊，去做出一個最好的判斷；資訊是如此重要，閱卷也是如此。 2007年7月4日公布修正刑事訴訟法第33條關於閱卷的規定，新法增加第2項無辯護人之被告於審判中得請求交付筆錄影本的規定，對於刑事被告閱卷權的保障是一大進步；另外，2007年6月15日大法官會議也對總統的刑事豁免權做出釋字第627號解釋，其中大法官對於機密認定的看法，與閱卷權的限制甚為相關。這些部分，本文都已經將之補入相關部分，並加以討論。

It is very important to the defendant that he has the right to access the file in criminal proceedings. But, because the domestic law is too simple, we still need to further discuss about the content of this right：subject, scope, limitation and how to appeal. This thesis tries to talk about the handle mode of access to the file from the practices in the European Convention of Human Rights and the German norms, and hopes to be beneficial to legislators and judicial practices in our country.

The first part of this paper is the profile of the domestic theories and practices and put the questions forward. Second, it introduces the European Convention of Human Rights and the practices of the European Court of Human Rights (the Court); moreover, it classifies the cases and sets up the handle mode of the Court. Third, it also introduces norms and practices in Germany, and observes the interaction between the Court and German practices. It sets up the handle mode of German law by connecting with case law of the Court. Then, it draws a conclusion to two handle modes, answers domestic questions and tries to build a domestic handle mode (new mode). It also discusses conflicts between new mode and domestic practices. Finally, it summaries two handle modes and the interaction between them, and proposes the suggestion about the defendant’s right of access to the file. After all, we don’t know what will be happened, but what we can do is to utilize existing information and make a best decision. The information is so important, this right is too.

This thesis has been added new Article 33 of criminal procedure law (2007.07.04) and Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 627 (2007.06.15).