| Summary: | 碩士 === 雲林科技大學 === 科技法律研究所 === 98 === Recently, the problem of hazardous waste arbitrarily discarded has become seriously day-by-day. Taiwan EPA has made multiple laws and standard to audit and control the job of hazardous waste clean away. In particular, after mid 20th century, industry and living style of mass production, heavy consumption, and large-scale waste has caused environmental pollution and damage, and endangered sustainable development of human generation. For a long time, we have been exploiting environmental resources to pursue economic growth. This has damaged global environment. In addition to using up of natural resources, environmental pollutions caused by technology development and manufacturing processes of industry also endanger environment that human beings rely on. The principle of “No Double Jeopardy Clause” is generally regarded as the constitutional rank, and belongs to the principle of “Rule of Law”. It can balance a country’s power of punishment and people’s right.
The first chapter is the exordium of the thesis.
Chapter 2 is based on the needs of environmental protection under the Constitution of R.O.C. In addition to the interpretation of the basis of environmental regulations, there are also detail explanations about the background of environmental administrative regulations in order to further understand the background of “Consecutive Fines”.
In Chapter3, I will discuss indefinite concepts of law and the principle of clarity and definiteness of law in the Waste Disposal Act. Because of the waste disposal’s highly trained professionalism, the disposal actions are not to be completely governed by ordinary laws. Therefore, the Undefined Legal Concept should be introduced into Waste Disposal Act. The importance of the waste disposal’s definition of Taiwan’s Waste Disposal Act is about the protection of fundamental human rights. Therefore defines clearly correctly regarding the relationships between Undefined Legal Concept and Principle of Clarity of Law is truly very essential.
In Chapter4, I will discuss the thesis first defines the conception of the “Double Jeopardy ”, and intends to interpret the inner substance, the hierarchy and the potency within this principle which is the position of the No Double Jeopardy clause and the issue of Consecutive Fines and the issue of continuous offenses and condition offenses.
In Chapter 5, results of this research show that the “Consecutive Fines” system is not a pecuniary fine but default surcharges.
In Chapter 6 is the conclusion of this thesis. The substantial parts of each chapter and the result of this research will be summarized into conclusion.
|
|---|
