中國大陸勞動教養制度發展之研究

Abstract

勞動教養這個中國的法律制度始於二十世紀五０年代這一特殊的反右、反革命時期，從一開始只是為了處理清查出來的反革命份子，至今為止卻實行了長達五十年之久。隨著以加強人權為重要內容的刑法、刑事訴訟法修訂與完善，立法法、行政處罰法的頒佈與施行，以及依法治國、建立社會主義法治國家作為一項重要的國策寫進了十五大，並載入憲法。中國大陸的社會歷史條件發生了巨大的變化，原來賴以建立勞動教養制度的社會基礎已不復存在。勞動教養制度的諸多缺陷已成為人權保障的羈絆，違背了法治中的正義理念，而成為中國大陸重大的現實課題。 隨著中國大陸市場經濟的發展，社會結構發生變化，從而暴露勞動教養的不正義、不合理性。雖然勞動教養制度做為國家維護政治統治與社會秩序的手段具有相當的有效性，但有效性卻是以犧牲個人的自由與權利為代價，它的有效性並不能抹煞勞動教養制度的反法治性與反正義性。因此研究勞動教養制度並不能僅僅站在勞動教養的社會功效和社會需要的立場上來看待它，更應該去審視其內在的價值正當性。 本文的研究方法為文獻分析法為主，比較研究法及個案研究法為輔。研究途徑則是歷史研究途徑、社會法學途徑與決策研究途徑並重。縱向的先從勞動教養制度創建以來的歷史脈絡中找出其變遷的原因，再橫向的探討勞動教養制度本身及其制定和變遷的背後社會因素。最後再尋求傳統的規範法學與行為主義的政治學兩個研究途徑的整合，藉由決策研究途徑做價值判斷、事實判斷與後果判斷。 因此本文從勞動教養的歷史面出發，瞭解勞動教養創建、變動之因後，再更深入分析勞動教養的缺陷，分析之後再對勞動教養的存廢作一分析。分析後主要的發現有五點，分別是：一、勞動教養在每個階段其存在的價值與其變遷的原因都是秩序；二、勞動教養的變遷過程是由政治型的勞動教養制度變遷為混合型的勞動教養制度，再轉變為社會型的勞動教養制度；三、《違法行為矯治法》提案出現的意義是為了秩序；四、勞動教養制度其存在五十年的原因是其價值問題；五、中國大陸推動勞動教養立法所面臨的各種阻力有待化解。並且建議未來勞動教養立法的主要目標即是朝向司法化。

The reeducation-through-labor system of China was started in the 1950th, a special counter right-wing and counter-revolutionary period. At first it was used to cope with the counter-revolutionists that were discovered, but until now it has been practicing for fifty years long. As the amendment and maturity of criminal law and criminal procedure law, which put emphasizes on human rights, the promulgation and implementation of legislation and administrative punishment law, and ruling by law and building a socialist country became important policies and were put into the 15th national congress of the Chinese communist party and the constitution, China’s social history conditions have changed dramatically, and the social foundations of building a reeducation-through-labor system no longer existed. Many flaws of the reeducation-through-labor system have become an obstacle of protecting human rights and have disobeyed the concept of justice. This has become an important practical issue in China. Along with the development of China’s market economy, their social structure has changed and therefore has exposed the improper and unreasonable characteristics of the reeducation-through-labor system. Although the reeducation-through-labor system has certain effectiveness as a method to maintain a country’s political governance and social order, the price is to sacrifice individual’s freedom and rights. The effectiveness cannot erase the improper and unreasonable characteristics of reeducation-through-labor system. Therefore, we cannot study the reeducation-through-labor system only in the case of its social effectiveness and demands but also its inside proper value. The research method used in this paper is mainly document method supplemented by comparative method and case study method. The research approaches are history approach, social law approach, and decision-making approach. We first longitudinally find why reeducation-through-labor system changed from its history. Then crosswisely study the reeducation-through-labor system itself, its establishment, and the social reasons for its changes. Finally, search for the integration of traditional legal norm and political behaviorism and make value judgment, fact judgment, and consequence judgment by decision-making approach. As a result, this paper starts from the historical side of reeducation-through-labor. After understanding how and why reeducation-through-labor system is built and changed, we analyze its flaws more deeply and whether this system should exist. We have five findings from this analysis. First, the value and the reason for reeducation-through-labor to change at every stage is order. Second, the process of its changes is from political reeducation-through-labor system to mixed reeducation-through-labor system, and then to social reeducation-through-labor system. Third, the meaning of the proposition “illegal behavior correction law” is order. Forth, the reason for reeducation-through-labor system to exist for fifty years ling is its value issue. Fifth, the resistance China faces while encouraging the legislating for reeducation-through-labor system is waiting to be solved, and we suggest that the future goal for the legislation for the reeducation-through-labor system should be its judicature.