A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority

碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 法律學系一般生組 === 107 === Because of the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.392 that declared the prosecutor’s right of detention was unconstitutional in 1995, the Legislative Yuan amended the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. During the amendment process, whether the...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: YANG, HAO-YUN, 楊皓勻
Other Authors: LI, RONG-GENG
Format: Others
Language:zh-TW
Published: 2019
Online Access:http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/4gqype
id ndltd-TW-107NTPU0194050
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-TW-107NTPU01940502019-08-24T03:36:37Z http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/4gqype A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority 我國偵查中羈押替代處分之檢討 ─以檢察官處分權為中心 YANG, HAO-YUN 楊皓勻 碩士 國立臺北大學 法律學系一般生組 107 Because of the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.392 that declared the prosecutor’s right of detention was unconstitutional in 1995, the Legislative Yuan amended the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. During the amendment process, whether the prosecutors’ right of the alternatives of detention, such as being released on bail, to the custody of another, or with a limitation on his residence, should be deleted was heatedly debated, but it was not deleted in the end. In recent years, the government has promoted judicial reform. In the judicial reform conference, several resolutions were made, including the limitation of the prosecutors’ authority of compulsory measures and the preventions of detention escape. The former focuses on the appropriateness of prosecutors’ authority of arresting and body examination, while the latter focuses on the review of the alternatives of detention, that is, preventions of detention escape, owing to the jump bail of significant financial crimes. For the realization of judicial reform, the main focus of the legislature is strengthening of the effect of alternatives of the detention, and this year, the Code of Criminal Procedure has been amended, besides the outbound restrictions, the additional also amended Article 116-2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, while expanding the scope and extent of restrictions of the alternatives of the detention to strengthen effect of the preventions of detention escape, we should also pay attention to the protection of the rights of criminal defendants and to reviewing whether the imposed restrictions are excessive. The Code of Criminal Procedure in Taiwan at present is quite inadequate about the relevant norms of the alternatives of the detention. In the system of that, both the essential elements and the procedures are attached to the detention. However, the alternatives of the detention will also result in restrictions on the rights of the criminal, and there is no corresponding norm for due process. Furthermore, the appropriateness of the prosecutors’ authority of the alternatives of the detention at investigation is also questionable. In light of the above issues, this article will review the inadequacy of the relevant legal system for the alternatives of the detention and the appropriateness of the prosecutors' authority, and refer to the bail system in the United States in a hope to serve as a reference for the Taiwan law to be more complete and more appropriate to protect human rights. LI, RONG-GENG 李榮耕 2019 學位論文 ; thesis 164 zh-TW
collection NDLTD
language zh-TW
format Others
sources NDLTD
description 碩士 === 國立臺北大學 === 法律學系一般生組 === 107 === Because of the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.392 that declared the prosecutor’s right of detention was unconstitutional in 1995, the Legislative Yuan amended the relevant provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. During the amendment process, whether the prosecutors’ right of the alternatives of detention, such as being released on bail, to the custody of another, or with a limitation on his residence, should be deleted was heatedly debated, but it was not deleted in the end. In recent years, the government has promoted judicial reform. In the judicial reform conference, several resolutions were made, including the limitation of the prosecutors’ authority of compulsory measures and the preventions of detention escape. The former focuses on the appropriateness of prosecutors’ authority of arresting and body examination, while the latter focuses on the review of the alternatives of detention, that is, preventions of detention escape, owing to the jump bail of significant financial crimes. For the realization of judicial reform, the main focus of the legislature is strengthening of the effect of alternatives of the detention, and this year, the Code of Criminal Procedure has been amended, besides the outbound restrictions, the additional also amended Article 116-2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However, while expanding the scope and extent of restrictions of the alternatives of the detention to strengthen effect of the preventions of detention escape, we should also pay attention to the protection of the rights of criminal defendants and to reviewing whether the imposed restrictions are excessive. The Code of Criminal Procedure in Taiwan at present is quite inadequate about the relevant norms of the alternatives of the detention. In the system of that, both the essential elements and the procedures are attached to the detention. However, the alternatives of the detention will also result in restrictions on the rights of the criminal, and there is no corresponding norm for due process. Furthermore, the appropriateness of the prosecutors’ authority of the alternatives of the detention at investigation is also questionable. In light of the above issues, this article will review the inadequacy of the relevant legal system for the alternatives of the detention and the appropriateness of the prosecutors' authority, and refer to the bail system in the United States in a hope to serve as a reference for the Taiwan law to be more complete and more appropriate to protect human rights.
author2 LI, RONG-GENG
author_facet LI, RONG-GENG
YANG, HAO-YUN
楊皓勻
author YANG, HAO-YUN
楊皓勻
spellingShingle YANG, HAO-YUN
楊皓勻
A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority
author_sort YANG, HAO-YUN
title A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority
title_short A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority
title_full A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority
title_fullStr A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority
title_full_unstemmed A Study on the Alternatives of Detention at Investigation: Focusing on the Prosecutors' Authority
title_sort study on the alternatives of detention at investigation: focusing on the prosecutors' authority
publishDate 2019
url http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/4gqype
work_keys_str_mv AT yanghaoyun astudyonthealternativesofdetentionatinvestigationfocusingontheprosecutorsauthority
AT yánghàoyún astudyonthealternativesofdetentionatinvestigationfocusingontheprosecutorsauthority
AT yanghaoyun wǒguózhēncházhōngjīyātìdàichùfēnzhījiǎntǎoyǐjiǎncháguānchùfēnquánwèizhōngxīn
AT yánghàoyún wǒguózhēncházhōngjīyātìdàichùfēnzhījiǎntǎoyǐjiǎncháguānchùfēnquánwèizhōngxīn
AT yanghaoyun studyonthealternativesofdetentionatinvestigationfocusingontheprosecutorsauthority
AT yánghàoyún studyonthealternativesofdetentionatinvestigationfocusingontheprosecutorsauthority
_version_ 1719236991725338624