受刑人權利之探討－以居住環境權為中心

Abstract

長久以來，受刑人的人權都是被忽略的一環，古今中外皆然。其原因在於，受刑人並非如一般人一樣享有自由及尊嚴，他們被認為是國家的奴隸，奴隸何以享有和我們一樣的權利。所幸在一連串艱辛的發展歷程中，受刑人的地位有了重大突破，可以主張基本權利。而我國自大法官會議第653號和第681號起，受刑人與國家的特別權力關係已然被破除，長期以來有關受刑人議題的討論僅在於受刑人是否享有訴訟權一事，而經過前述二則大法官會議的解釋，我國受刑人地位的發展與國際潮流更加契合。本論文之焦點為受刑人於監獄內之居住環境處遇，例如因超額收容而導致居住空間之不足、溫度與通風、採光、床鋪、給養、衛生、環境有害因子以及運動和戶外活動時間；透過比較美國法的方式，探討受刑人得享有之權利以及構成權利侵害之標準，最後提供救濟之方法。 美國法院自1960年代起一改先前對受刑人權利消極的態度，大開法院之大門開始介入監獄機關和受刑人間之紛爭。其以美國憲法增修條文第八條為核心，發展出一套主觀和客觀標準，用以檢視監獄機關之作為及監獄環境是否有違反憲法。違憲者，法院會判決命令監獄機關改正，以捍衛憲法所保障之權利。

In Taiwan, prisoner’s right has long been ignored by both the government and the public. The criminals were once to be thought as the slave of the state, they deserve no fundamental rights as the freemen do. Judicial Yuan interpretation No. 653 and No. 681 emphasize that the protection from the Constitution is no difference from freeman; every prisoner has the right to be protected. This thesis is focusing on the living condition of prisoner in prison, such as overcrowding, shelter, sanitation, environment hazards and exercise and outside recreation. Through the American lesson, we could construct standards to determine whether the prison authority or the prison environment violates the rights of prisoner. American court open its door to accept law suits from the prisoners, since the 60’s. The Eighth Amendment bars cruel and unusual punishment. As such, it is the only provision of the Bill of Rights that is applicable by its own terms to prisoners. Eighth Amendment is not a static provision, it has evolved three general principles. The first is that Eighth Amendment applies to cases involving prison conditions. Secondly, the Eighth Amendment has both a subjective and objective component. Finally, the test for subjective component will depend on the particular Eighth Amendment claim that is being raised, if the claim involve with prison conditions, “deliberate indifference” will be applied.