法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 精神障礙被告之就審能力:從 CRPD 與 Noble v. Australia 案出發(Exploring Competency to Stand Trial of Mentally Disordered Defendant: In the Wake of CRPD and UN Decision on Marlon Noble Case)
編著譯者: 林慈偉
出版日期: 2019.08
刊登出處: 台灣/月旦醫事法報告第 34 期 /22-39 頁
頁  數: 12 點閱次數: 493
下載點數: 48 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 林慈偉
關 鍵 詞: 不歧視身心障礙者權利公約無障礙/可及性就審能力精神障礙被告
中文摘要: 精神障礙被告與就審能力議題長期為臺灣實務及學界所忽略,透過身心障礙者權利公約及相關人權公約的施行,應可為此議題再注入活水,而有進一步討論的空間。本文以精神障礙被告之就審能力此一前階刑事程序議題,輔以身心障礙者權利公約所採納而法律學說與實務相對陌生的幾項概念,包括基於身心障礙之平等不歧視、司法保護等,檢視精神障礙被告權益是否以及如何被具體落實於相關訴訟程序,並提出相關建議。
英文關鍵詞: non-discriminationConvention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, CRPDbarrier-free/accessibilitycompetency to stand trialmentally disordered defendant
英文摘要: Mentally disordered defendant and their competency to stand trial were often neglected by domestic practitioners and academia. Ensuing the implementation of Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and its affiliated human rights conventions, an onset of further discussion and an influx of new perspectives should be expected. By the preliminary criminal procedural issue of competency to stand trial of mentally disordered defendants, this article will utilize several concepts adopted by CRPD, including equality/non-discrimination based on disability and judicial protection, which domestic academia and practitioners find to be obscure, to inspect whether and how the rights of mentally disordered defendants were protected in procedures of related litigations, and attempt to provide relevant suggestions.
目  次: 壹、前言
貳、就審能力規定及實務運作現況
一、就審能力之規範目的
二、「心神喪失」範圍之過度限縮
三、就審能力與責任能力兩者有別且應優先於責任能力之判斷
參、CRPD 相關規定及 Noble v. Australia 案
一、公約關聯性
(一)CRPD 第 5 條(平等與不歧視)
(二)CRPD 第 12 條(在法律之前獲得平等承認)
(三)CRPD 第 13 條(獲得司法保護)
(四)CRPD 第 14 條(人身自由與安全)
(五)CRPD 第 15 條(免於酷刑或殘忍,不人道或有辱人格之待遇或處罰)
二、Noble v. Australia 案
(一)案情
(二)CRPD 委員會意見
肆、從 CRPD 重新檢視精神障礙被告之就審能力規制
伍、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
    返回功能列