| Summary: | 碩士 === 玄奘大學 === 法律學系碩士班 === 103 === As early as 4.2.1981, former president Chang Ching-Kuo mentioned in one of his speeches that ‘accidents are frequently occurring and causing death and injury. This means our traffic regulations face a problem and have to be improved thoroughly’. This is an early sign of problem awareness and points to the huge impact traffic accidents have on the whole of society. The World Medical Association pointed as early as 2010 to the fact, that traffic accidents are the 3rd most important factor contributing to disease and injury worldwide.
Amongst traffic accidents, negligence is the most common cause leading to the openingof a criminal investigation, thus consuming lots of administrative and judicial resources. Resources are strained in terms of material and human capital. Therefore, the author tries to analyze the vast corpus of traffic related norms and to discuss the following: are norms defining the scope of what constitutes an accident sufficient? How about expert opinion in traffic accidents? Are norms concerning traffic appropriate when dealing with traffic accidents? Have these rules an accident lowering impact?
Amongst all the differing responsibilities of today’s police, traffic and traffic accidents are demanding tasks; man power, operational skills, development of standard procedures, all these are to be dealt with in an effective way. In this respect, the author reflects his past experiences as a member of the police force.
Regarding criminal negligence in traffic, the thesis analyzes the borderline of determining criminal cases and the problem of what cases are worth criminal punishment. In this respect, the author discusses the example of the Anglo-American law system that divides negligence into gross negligence and common negligence. The former is a case for criminal law, the latter is dealt with by administrative law. It is considered to what extent such a dual approach might help the Taiwanese practice, especially when it comes to cases where one party tries to bully the other party by using a criminal case in order to pressure for private law compensation.
Due to this, the author hopes that his thesis may be useful for practitioners and for legal scholars alike when it comes to improving the current situation. There is room for enhancing human rights within the quarrels of traffic litigation.
|
|---|
