我國刑事立法兩極化趨勢之研究

Abstract

2005年我國立法院通過刑法暨刑法施行法部分條文修正草案，法務部認為這標誌著我國進入「寬嚴並進的刑事政策」的時代，亦即刑事立法政策將趨向兩極化。然而，當今研究卻鮮少以量化實證、政策議程的角度切入，了解國刑事立法是否真的趨向兩極化、不同政策領域的政策傾向與趨勢是否有所差異。因此本研究試圖了解我國刑事立法是否如同我國政府所宣示的具有兩極化之傾向，又不同政策領域的傾向及發展趨勢為何。 本文整理我國自1987年解除戒嚴令至2017年刑事立法法案共447筆，並運用Policy Agendas Project（PAP）編碼規則及兩極化刑事立法編碼規則將上述法案依照政策領域及立法傾向分類。 本文研究發現，從法案數整體及比例來看，我國刑事立法較偏向嚴格化，且嚴格刑事立法法案數與寬鬆刑事立法法案數的差距逐漸擴大。然而，各政策領域的傾向並不完全一致，發展趨勢也有所差異，影響各政策領域的變遷因子也不盡相同。 透過本研究，在實務層面，本文建議我國政府應該重新檢視刑事立法政策發展方向，我國立法者應更審慎立法，而非僅是採用亂世用重典或者民粹式立法的態度，更應該修正消極回應的角色，積極肩負起立法者的責任。在學術層面，則可補足過去文獻對於刑事立法政策研究的侷限，應可對於未來刑事立法研究、政策議程研究有所助益。

In 2005, the Legislative Yuan of Taiwan passed the amendments of Criminal Law and the Implication Act of Criminal Law, which was deemed by the Ministry of Justice as the mark of officially implementing the bipolar criminal policy. However, there have been few empirical research to verify whether the bipolar criminal policy is really put into practice under the context of policy agenda, and whether the answer differs between different areas of policy. Therefore, this paper will try to analyze the trends of penal legislation in all areas. More specifically, this paper aims to answer the following questions: Does the penal legislation tend to be harder or softer? In what areas of policy are penal legislation becoming harder? Do all areas follow the same pattern? This study analyzes the criminal legislation of Taiwan from July 15th, 1987 to December 31st, 2017. After data cleaning, the final sample includes 447 amendments, and this study uses two coding system to classify the amendments, which are the codebook of the Policy Agendas Project (PAP) and the coding rules of bipolar criminal legislation. The results show that the legislation tends to be harder, in terms of both percentage and totality, and the gap between the amounts of the harder ones and the softer ones are increasing. However, the tendency in each area of policy is not the same. Not only the tendency is different, the factors that affected the tendency of different areas are different as well. This research contributes to both academic and practical fields. In the academic field, this research results can clarify and improve the theories of criminal legislation and policy agendas. As for the practical field, this paper questions whether the government of Taiwan executes bipolar criminal legislation, and suggests that the Taiwanese government review the tendency of criminal legislation. Furthermore, the legislators should be more cautious when amending the laws and should avoid populist legislation.