| 關 鍵 詞： |
評議；國民法官；說明；職權主義；當事人主義 |
| 中文摘要： |
國民法官法為刑事訴訟程序之一部，自應遵守憲法公正審判原則與正當程序原則。然而，國民法官法第 82 條第 4 項：「審判長認有必要時，應向國民法官說明經法官合議決定之證據能力、證據調查必要性之判斷、訴訟程序之裁定及法令之解釋。」規定，忽略當事人與辯護人在場獲知訴訟資訊之權利，並不符釋字第 762 號解釋：「未賦予有辯護人之被告直接獲知卷證資訊之權利，且未賦予被告得請求付與卷內筆錄以外之卷宗及證物影本之權利，妨害被告防禦權之有效行使，於此範圍內，與憲法第 16 條保障訴訟權之正當法律程序原則意旨不符。」因當事人與辯護人無法於法官作出實質損害被告利益或是重大違背法令之情形中提起救濟，與憲法法庭 111 年憲判字第 7 號判決有所抵觸。為避免來自法院的突襲，宜立法修正此一瑕疵。
|
| 英文關鍵詞： |
Deliberation；Citizen Judge；Explanation；Inquisition System；Adversary System |
| 英文摘要： |
The Citizen Judges Act is part of the criminal justice system, it should follow the constitutional principles of fair trial and due process. Paragraph 4 of Article 82 of the Citizen judges Act, providing that: “The presiding judge shall, if he or she deems it necessary, elaborate to the citizen judges matters on the admissibility of evidence, the necessity of the investigation of evidence, the rulings regarding the litigation proceedings and the interpretation of laws and regulations, which have been exclusively determined by the panel of judges,” ignores the right of the parties and the counsel to access to litigation information, which is against the Grand Justice Interpretation of No. 762, holding that: “a pro se defendant may pay the required fees in advance to request copies of minutes in the dossier at trial yet which fails to provide a defendant with counsel the right to directly access information in the dossier, or a defendant with or without counsel the right to request copies of anything other than the minutes in the dossier, hinders the defendant from effectively defending the case. In this, the first part of Paragraph 2 of Article 33 of the Criminal Procedure Code is in contravention of the constitutional guarantee of due process under Article 16 of the Constitution.” While the parties and the counsel could not seek for remedies as the judge’s explanation to citizen judges in the final deliberation be incorrect, it conflicts with the Constitutional Court ruling of No. 111 Hsien Pan 7. In order to avoid the ambush from the court, Congress should revise Paragraph 4 of Article 82 of the Citizen Judges Act.
|
| 目 次： |
壹、前言
貳、現行評議中說明規範與疑義
參、美國法之陪審團指示
肆、分析檢討
伍、結論
|
| 相關法條： |
 |
| 相關判解： |
|
| 相關函釋： |
|
| 相關論著： |
|