家庭暴力防治法刑事保護令：制度分析與刑事司法人員回應之探討

Abstract

家庭暴力防治法設有學說上所稱的「刑事保護令」規範，類型上區分為釋放條件、緩刑條件以及假釋條件，由檢察官或法院核發，條件內容主要為人身安全保護與加害人處遇。 本研究探討刑事保護令的制度特色與運作情形：刑事保護令具有案件附隨性、高度仰賴檢察官與法院職權核發、執行程序主動性，以及法律效果明確而強烈等特性，其優點在於核發與執行程序相對快速，並有較高嚇阻效果，缺點則是較難為被害人接近使用，運作上易受警察、檢察官以及法官處理家庭暴力案件的認知與態度所影響；藉由官方所公布的家庭暴力案件相關統計數據與其他相關文獻研究觀察刑事司法系統回應家庭暴力案件的情形，則發現刑事保護令極少被使用，案件進行的不同階段也存在其他缺失，刑事司法系統對於家暴被害人之保護尚有未足。 本研究認為刑事保護令與民事保護令同為司法系統回應家庭暴力案件的重要手段，為強化對於家庭暴力被害人之保護，提升刑事保護令的使用與解決刑事司法系統回應家庭暴力案件的缺失，本文認為在立法上可賦予家庭暴力被害人刑事保護令聲請權，另一方面則借鏡德國暴力防治法「施暴者離開，被害人留下」之立法思維以及美國禁止撤回告訴政策作為修法參考。除法制面之修正，同時亦應加強刑事司法人員防治家庭暴力在職教育，並提升防治網絡中不同單位之聯繫與合作。

Conditions of release, probation and parole in Domestic Violence Prevention Act are theoretically called as criminal protection orders, which are issued by the prosecutor or the court, aiming to protect the safety of victims of domestic violence from being threatened by the perpetrators. This thesis focuses on what the features are of criminal protection orders and how criminal protection orders work. The features of criminal protection orders can be concluded in four aspects. First, criminal protection orders can only be issued accompanying with ongoing criminal cases. Second, whether to issue criminal protection orders is highly dependent on the initiative of the prosecutor or the court. Third, the enforcement procedure of criminal protection orders tends to be proactive. Fourth, the legal consequence that a perpetrator may face if s/he breaches a criminal protection order is definite and forceful. The features mentioned above lead to advantages and disadvantages of how criminal protection orders work. The advantages are expected to include fast issuing and enforcement procedure, and strong power to deter the perpetrators; on the other hand, it is hard for victims of domestic violence to access to criminal protection orders, and how criminal protection orders work tends to be influenced by how the criminal justice system, which involves police, prosecutors and judges, acknowledges domestic violence and what attitudes it has toward domestic violence when dealing with the cases. Observing the circumstances of the criminal justice system responding to domestic violence through the official statistics and the related studies, the researcher found that criminal protection orders are rarely issued, and some other defects also appear in different stages in the criminal procedure. Thus, it is believed that the protection from the criminal justice system for victims of domestic violence is inadequate. As means of the judicial system in response to domestic violence, criminal protection orders are as important as civil protection orders. In order to strengthen the protection for victims of domestic violence, increase the use of criminal protection orders, and find solutions to the defects in criminal procedure, this thesis suggests giving victims of domestic violence the right to file a petition with the prosecutor or the court for a criminal protection order, learning from the core philosophy, “the violent person leaves, the victims can stay,” of the Protection Against Violence Act of Germany, and the no-drop policies adopted in the U.S. as references to amend the Domestic Violence Prevention Act in Taiwan. Meanwhile, enhancing on-the-job education concerning domestic violence prevention to criminal justice personnel and intensifying connection and cooperation in between the domestic violence prevention network are suggested.