受拘禁人之家庭生活權

Abstract

隨著社會法治觀念的演進，人權問題也逐步被重視，然而常見討論範疇聚焦於一般人，受拘禁人（包含受刑人及受羈押之被告）作為犯罪者或犯罪嫌疑人，辦隨著充滿敵視的社會觀點，其權益該如何保障及實現，往往受社會大眾所忽略，甚而過往法界以所謂特別權利關係去詮釋受拘禁人之權利地位，藉此合理化其權益不受保障之種種措施。 然而隨著大法官於多號釋字逐漸揚棄特別權利關係之概念，多則釋字如第 653號、第 654 號、第 681號及第 691 號開始逐步建構出受拘禁人受憲法上保障之權利，由於受拘禁人之權利面向亦為廣泛，故聚焦於其是否能享有所謂「家庭生活權」，再具體就婚姻權利、接見及親密接觸、生育活動及返家探視等實際措施為探討。 美國法院針對受刑人，乃以美國憲法增修條文第八條為本，建構出主觀及客觀之審查標準，並以之檢視監獄機關之作為是否違憲；針對受羈押之被告，則多以美國憲法增修條文第五條及第十四條為據，以所謂「正當法律程序」建構出審查標準。透過分析美國法院數則個案及文獻評析，檢視我國監獄行刑法或行刑累進處遇條例等法規，可知我國在家庭生活權上之保障，仍有規範密度不足、立法模式值得商榷或監所裁量權並無監度機制等問題，期許能透過對於受拘禁人家庭生活權之重視，進而改善我國法規。

As the social legal awareness evolves, issues of human right have also been increasingly valued gradually. Nevertheless, the scale of those discussions often focuses on the ordinary public. As for the inmates (including the prisoners and the accused in detention) being a criminal or suspect, the social viewpoints full of hostility and discrimination follow them consistently. Under such premise, how the inmates’ right and interest can be protected and implemented is frequently ignored by the general public. Actually, in the past, the law profession interpreted the inmates’ right and position with the “Das besondere Gewaltverhaltnis（special power relationship）” to rationalize the inmates’ right and interest unprotected by a variety of measures. Nonetheless, since the Justices gradually abandon the concept of Special Power Relationship in many Interpretations, such as Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 654, No.681, and No. 691, that the inmates have the right to be constitutionally protected has started to be constructed little by little. On the other side, due to the extensive dimension of the inmates’ rights, this study concentrates on whether they can have “The Family Right” first, and then probes into the practical measures in terms of right of marriage,visiting and conjugal rights, birth event, and home visit. For the prisoners in the U.S., on the basis of Eighth Amendment, the courts have constructed the subjective and objective supervisory standards, and examined whether the prison organs are unconstitutional. As for the accused in detention, with Fifth and Fourteenth Amendment, the inspection standard has been constructed subject to the “Due process of law”. Through analyzing several cases in the U.S. courts and the relative literature, this study has reviewed “Law of Execution in Prison” and “Statute of Progressive Execution of Penalty” in Taiwan, finding that the laws of the Family Right in Taiwan are not sufficient enough, the law regulation model is questionable, the prisons’ discretion lacks a supervisory mechanism, and etc. In this sense, it is expected that more emphasis can be put on the inmates’ family life, and then further improve associative laws and regulations in Taiwan.