日治時期臺灣監獄制度與實踐

Abstract

本論文探討日治時期臺灣的監獄制度形成過程，以及監獄制度與其他刑罰制度與實踐之關連，監獄技術如何呈現帝國社會控制的權力與知識關係。並從監獄制度的具體實踐，觀看其對臺灣社會表達什麼樣的權威與象徵意義，臺灣人民又如何看待監獄制度與實踐，從多面向的因素考察，由此看到在制度與實踐的交互關係中，呈現的殖民地臺灣法律文化。 日本帝國迫於西歐帝國注視的現代化與文明化壓力，以及國內明治維新志士的倡議，監獄成為現代性指標之一，帶動日本監獄改革，促成現代型監獄的整備事業。現代型監獄制度在臺灣的變遷過程，延續帝國的社會秩序之一統和其他西歐帝國的凝視，基本上延長日本內地的刑罰制度，成為日本統治臺灣的文明化任務之一。監獄制度建置過程中，初始尚沒有現代型監獄建築，造成囚犯逃脫的情形嚴重，監獄處遇亦非常不人道。直到現代型監獄建築完成，方逐步邁入軌道，再結合監獄官僚化和釋放者保護制度，如此確立臺灣監獄制度的架構。 監獄作為一項文明化負擔，這項負擔並不輕鬆，所以總督府透過笞刑來和緩監獄建築的預算壓力，並且多利用罰金刑、起訴便宜主義方式以及警政系統，來達到控制臺灣社會，呈現社會控制的政治經濟學。再加上對被殖民者的歧視、臺灣在帝國版圖的戰線位置和監獄預算，使得臺灣監獄制度越到戰爭時期，與日本內地和朝鮮相比，呈現規訓不足的狀態，生產次等國民。由此，補充Foucault的觀點，在不同的政治經濟學考量下，規訓與法律關係有其異質性存在。 日本帝國透過監獄來灌注和宣揚帝國權威，強化其支配性道德，由此來鍛造被殖民者為日本帝國臣民。受刑人被認為是一時落後於社會的人，國家有義務和責任教化這些犯罪人，使其能夠復歸社會。一方面顯示當時的犯罪人圖像有著濃厚的集體責任觀念，並未只將犯罪視為個人責任；另外一方面，亦將受刑人置入日本帝國秩序之下，配合著日本皇室儀式而展演，真宗獨佔監獄，宣揚日本天皇精神，成為天皇的秩序象徵。監獄主要作為臺灣社會生活條件不佳者的規訓空間，帝國教誨、戒護、作業等一整套工程，用來規訓受刑人，結合社會事業和警察的力量，讓受刑人具備天皇制下的勞動精神，灌輸臺灣社會勞動作為一項美德的觀念；監獄照護義務雖然確實帶來一定的文明化和改善，卻也透過分類制度予以差別化受刑人處遇。並且，監獄照護義務與社會上部分要求懲罰的情感有所衝突，成為不斷需要面對的難題。又，現代型監獄以戒護來規訓受刑人的紀律，服膺於監獄秩序，卻同時造成暴力的擅斷。可以看到因為現代刑事訴訟與刑事執行走入非公開的監獄執行，社會大眾看不到國家刑罰的運作，只有監獄官僚和受刑人彼此相互知道刑罰的實際運作，造成去文明化產生的可能，這樣的遮蔽促成缺乏理解的可能，表現現代性法律的雙面性。 面對實際監獄運作不合乎現代型監獄理念和法律規範的部分，臺灣知識份子以現代型法律的概念來要求改善和啟發民眾。如此呈現殖民者帶來的現代型法律賦予的解放和批判可能；只是殖民地政治言論空間的有限性，造成這樣的衝擊和批判亦有限。 從臺灣社會的法意識來看殖民地的刑法與刑罰，充滿了多元性和相互衝突與矛盾，有的法意識信賴殖民地法律的運作和權威，或結合其自身的道德與情感，因而即便是對其他人來講欠缺法治的制度，也會加以利用，如此構築殖民地刑法與刑罰之合法性；但也有法意識信仰人民的自由，面對殖民統治的權威，抱持著懷疑和挑戰法律的態度，甚至將一些犯罪行為表現為對抗殖民、擁抱自由的象徵，拆解殖民地法律的合法性。 日治50年的現代型監獄制度與實踐，現代型法律進入臺灣，帝國透過形式的法律之名來進行殖民統治，這些法律並非對於法律實踐者毫無拘束力，其亦會實質地拘束帝國統治；然而，殖民統治亦會產生其例外性法律，藉由這些不符合法治要求的法律和例外於殖民母國的法律，來生產次等帝國臣民，維繫日本帝國的權威。對於這樣的法律，部分臺灣人站出來挺身批評，以現代型法律來檢驗這些法律，呼應和要求改革；但同時也可以看到即便這些制度不符法治，可是其向帝國臣民所表達的道德教諭，卻也可能為部分人民所接受。所以，以監獄為中心來思考殖民統治下的法律，各種法意識交互存在和競逐，形構殖民統治下的多元法律文化面貌。

This thesis explores the process of the prison formation in Taiwan under Japanese rule, the relation with institutions and practices of the penal system, how the techniques of the prison demonstrated power and knowledge within empire’s social control. Through concrete practices of the prison, what kind authority and symbolic significance the empire expressed to Taiwan society, and how Taiwanese interacted with the prison. I want to disclosure the interaction between institutions and practices to find the legal culture of colonial Taiwan. The prison became one of indicators of modernization and civilization. The prison reform was promoted by Western European Empires and Meiji Restoration patriots. The process of the modern prison in Taiwan was driven by unification of the empire’s social order and the gazing of western European Empire. One of civilizing tasks which Japanese empire ruling was to extend the penal system from metropolitan regime. However, in the beginning, there was no modern prison buildings to treat prisoners, therefore, resulted in many prisoners escaped and inhuman treatment. Until the modern prison buildings completed, combined the bureaucracy of the prison and the institution of after-care, the mechanism of the modern prison in Taiwan established. The prison as a civilizing mission cost a lot of budget, therefore Japanese empire used other kinds of punishment such as flogging, fine and shelving indictments to release the pressure from establishing the prison, through this way which presents political economy of social control. In addition, comparing to Japan and Korea, discriminating the colonial and strategic position of Second Sino-Japanese War made institutions of the prison in Taiwan to present ill-disciplined, reproduce inferior subjects. From this perspective and historical investigation, I resupply Foucault’s view about the relation between discipline and law existence heterogeneity accomplish with different concern of political economy. Japanese empire used the prison to deliver and disseminate authority of empire, to consolidate the morality of control and reproduce empire subjects. Inmates were treated as backwardness in the society. The state had responsibility to correct and educate these criminals to enable return to the society. On one hand, this way showed rich concept of collective responsibility, not treat crime as merely individual responsibility. On other hand, empire placed these inmates under order of the Japanese empire, co-operated with royal ceremony rituals. Besides, the Shin sect (of Buddhism) monopolized the education and correction of the prison, to advocate the sprit of the emperor. The prison as discipline space for the poor in Taiwan society used correct, guard and labor to discipline inmates, accomplishing with social work and the police to make inmates have sprit of labor under the empire. While it was true that the prison health care obligations bring civilize, but it could also be differentiated through the classification system.Furthermore, it was a constant problem that the prison health care obligation conflicted with emotions of part society requiring harsh punish. In addition, the prison emphasized to maintain domestic order with regulating inmates body, moreover, producing arbitrarily prison violence. In this way, although the prison was named modern prison, prison execution go to behind the scene, the social could not understand what have done in the prison apart from inmates and bureaucracy. Hiding from view reproduced the possibility of de-civilizing. It represented paradox of the modern law. Facing practices of the prison which did not conform ideas and norms of the prison, Taiwan intellectuals advocated concepts of modern law to improve and enlighten the people. The modern law which colonists brought entitled possibility of emancipation and critic. However, colonial’s political speech made limited effects. There were full of diversity and conflicts in the dimension of criminal law and punishment of colonial Taiwan, partly legal consciousness trusted operations and authority of law, with combining their moral rules and emotions to justify and use the law even for others had no legitimacy, to construct legality of criminal law and punishment of colonial law. However, another legal consciousness believed and committed the freedom of people with suspecting and challenging the law, even sculptured some criminal behaviors as symbol of rebelling colonizers and pursuing freedom, to against the authority of colonial government and deconstruct the legality. During this period, the reception of modern law was processing in Taiwan. The empire used the formal law to government colony. The law sometime could restrain the practicer. However, colonial government also produced exception which don’t conform rule of law to reproduce inferior subjects, to maintain the authority of empire. Confronting the law, partly Taiwanese critiqued it and wanted to improve. But some accepted the law due to conform their moral. Therefore, many kinds of legal consciousness interacted and competed to form diversity of colonial government