法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 以一事不再理論撤回起訴(The Withdrawal of Indictment under the Examination of the Right Against Double Jeopardy)
編著譯者: 王兆鵬
出版日期: 2008.03
刊登出處: 台灣/國立臺灣大學法學論叢第 37 卷 第 1 期 /1-30 頁
頁  數: 30 (授權者自訂售價) 點閱次數: 296
下載點數: 300 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 王兆鵬
關 鍵 詞: 一事不再理一行為不二罰撤回起訴既判力禁止雙重危險當事人進行主義正當法律程序訴訟權
中文摘要: 本文主張一事不再理為刑事被告憲法上之基本人權,在審判期日之證據調查開始時,被告即受該權利之保護。如檢察官在此一時點之後撤回起訴,雖無判決之形成,但因為被告已受該權利之保護,除有合於憲法例外之情形,不得就同一犯罪再為起訴。在一事不再理之權利附著「後」,本文主張檢察官若未得被告之同意,不得撤回起訴。我國刑事訴訟法第 269 條,准許檢察官不經被告同意即得撤回起訴,並得就同一案件在符合第 260 條規定再行起訴,部份違反被告一事不再理之權利。就撤回起訴之確定問題,現行法混淆起訴「前」及起訴「後」程序之本質,並不正確,本文建議﹕告訴人對於檢察官撤回起訴之決定不服,應準用交付審判程序之法理,由法院決定撤回起訴是否有理由。
英文關鍵詞: double jeopardywithdrawal of indictmentattachment of jeopardyre-prosecutionsame offenseconsent of withdrawaldue process of law
英文摘要: A criminal defendant’s right against double jeopardy shall have its constitutional origin in Taiwan even though the Constitution does not have any words about it. Taiwan’s Code of Criminal Procedure (CCP) allows a prosecutor to withdraw the indictment without the defendant’s consent before the closing arguments at trial. Under CCP, a prosecutor has broad discretion to indict the same offense as long as there are new facts, evidence or other specific reasons. The justification for the re-prosecution of the same offense is the traditional concept that the right against double jeopardy does not attach until a verdict is given and becomes final. This Article argues that the relevant provisions in CCP allowing the re-prosecution of the same offense after the withdrawal of indictment are unconstitutional. This Article bases its argument on the ground that a defendant is put in jeopardy even though the criminal proceeding against him terminates before verdict. Furthermore, this Article argues that the right against double jeopardy in Taiwan shall attach when the court starts the examination of evidence at trial. After this point, a prosecutor may not withdraw the indictment without the defendant’s consent. However, before this point, a prosecutor may withdraw the indictment only under the reasons specified in the Article 269 of CCP. A prosecutor may not re-prosecute the same offence unless he meets the conditions specified in the Article 260 of CCP.
目  次: 壹、導論
貳、一事不再理與撤回起訴
一、憲法原則及核心價值
二、判決形成前即受保護
三、附著時間
參、被告同意撤回起訴
肆、權利未附著前之保護
伍、撤回起訴之確定
陸、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
      返回功能列