Reserch in the Appropriateness of jurisdiction,and penalty of “Social Order Maintenance Act”

• Main Authors: Sun,Fu-Tso, 孫福佐
• Other Authors: Hsigh,Jung-ang
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2017
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/dankc8

碩士 === 中國文化大學 === 法律學系碩士在職專班 === 106 === “Social Order Maintenance Act” of this nation was established after the Supreme Court interpreted “Police Offense Act” as unconstitutional. The Judicial Yuan Interpretation of Police Offense Act number 166 and 251 declared that limiting personal freedom via detention and punishment is unconstitutional and shall be abolished within two years, Due to time restraints, “Social Order Maintenance Act” was created and transferred the decision to limit personal freedom and detain from police authority to District Court in order to uphold the Constitution, while the agenda, jurisdiction, and penalty of “Social Order Maintenance Act” remained unchanged from “Police Offense Act” As society progresses and civil right swells, not only have the law enforcement personnel perceived the unpracticality of “Social Order Maintenance Act”, the public also became aware of the invasive nature of “Social Order Maintenance Act” toward constitutional right, Take “detention” for example, even though it is now under the jurisdiction of the court, whether the offense should refrain from impeding personal freedom and the remedies for procedure flaws are still questionable In addition, business injunctions such as cease operation were carried out by police authority according to “Social Order Maintenance Act”. However, the results are often unsuccessful since the enforcement often infringes the” freedom to operate business” and “property right” which is beyond the jurisdiction of police authority. This thesis examine wide array of illegal offenses that divided into four chapters of 29 acts including endangering public order, endangering good moral, obstructing government administration, and infringement upon the freedoms and property of other persons. The punishable offense included in these acts varies greatly, certain acts contains no tangible value and has no record of enforcement since the establishment. Furthermore, “request detention” is controversial in that by executing the detention, the punishment transforms from monetary penalty to personal freedom penalty that are protected by Constitution article eight. Such oversight requires further investigation. Moreover, the aspect that police authority oversteps their jurisdiction when enforcing business injunctions is especially troublesome. The current system is inefficient, and potentially damaging to the reputation of government authorities and the right civilians. Base on those criticisms, this thesis will offer an insightful discussion regarding the agenda of these acts, the difficulty in exercising the laws, commentary and possible future improvements.