法律之前，人人平等？− 以上級審刑事案件探討貧富差距下被告受律師扶助之權益

Abstract

我國刑事辯護資源有三：公設辯護人、義務辯護律師以及財團法人法律扶助基金會（以下簡稱法扶）的法扶律師，本文研究之重點在於法扶律師擔任刑事案件辯護人之品質與一般聘請律師擔任辯護人之品質是否有差異？這一直是人民與法扶機構欲探討之焦點，國家設立法律扶助基金會之目的是希望給予無資力負擔訴訟費用與律師酬金的民眾專業法律上的協助，落實人人平等之理想，但若難以控管其品質，無法確保人民所受有的律師協助是實質有效的，恐怕難以達到平等理想之實現。 本文以刑事案件為主要研究對象，以我國刑事訴訟制度為基礎，在改良式當事人進行主義下，說明人民享有辯護權利之實質內容，藉由憲法、判決、大法官解釋之內容來闡述辯護權實質內容之演變，並介紹我國法律扶助基金會之設立，了解法扶制度之內容以及歷年來之演變，並透過法扶的年度報告了解目前實務上所面臨的問題。 我國法扶之制度設計多參考國外法扶的制度，例如近年來的檢警第一次偵訊律師陪同到場專案，即是參考英國法扶的當值律師制度而設立，近年來法扶也舉辦了多場國際研討會來了解各國法律扶助之制度內容，因此本文亦會介紹國外的法扶制度，了解其制度內容作為我國法扶將來可改進方向之參考。 實證的部份將藉由判決蒐集以及質性訪談來了解目前實務上之狀況，以判決蒐集進行量化統計的分析，了解由法扶指派律師擔任辯護人之案件與自行聘請律師擔任辯護人之案件的上訴駁回率，以及以該審判決是否對於被告更有利為判斷基準來作統計上的分析，比較由法扶律師擔任辯護人與自行聘請律師擔任辯護人是會對於被告的判決更有利或不利；質性訪談則透過實務工作者，藉由審、檢、辯三方的訪談資料來了解實際上法扶運作之狀況，以及對於現行制度的想法，並了解目前制度可能存有之缺失。 最後希望透過本文的研究，了解法扶律師品質之實際狀況後，就制度層面上提出一些建議，讓整個法扶的制度能更加完整，也徹底保障人民的訴訟權利，落實「法律之前，人人平等」之理想實現。

There are three resources of the criminal defense systems in Taiwan: public defenders, pro bono legal counsels from the bar association assigned by the judge and the attorneys of Legal Aid Foundation (LAF). My research focuses on the LAF in Taiwan to see the performance differences between the cases defended by the attorney of LAF and the attorney hired by the defendant itself. It has been the most significant research issue that relates to the right to counsel of people over the decade. In order to fulfill the ideal of “ All are equal before the law”, LAF provides a legal service to the indigent people who cannot afford the litigation expenses and attorney fees. However, if the LAF cannot monitor the quality of legal aid services, it cannot assure the rights to counsel of the defendants are protected under the law. The thesis aims at the criminal cases based on the criminal procedure in Taiwan. The author will introduce the content of the right to counsel under the reformed adversary system, and elaborate the development of the right to counsel by the Constitution, the J.Y. Interpretation and cases. Besides, the regulation of the LAF and the development process since it has founded will be introduced. Then the difficulties the LAF encounters in the recent years will be discussed. The LAF legislates the Legal Aid Law by using many foreign legal aid regulations as references. For example, according to the duty solicitor in England, the LAF provides the program to assist the defendant at the first interrogation during investigation. Besides, the LAF has held many international conferences to broaden their understanding about the regulation of the legal aid system in many foreign countries. Two foreign legal aid systems will be introduced, which we can take as references to improve the legal aid system in Taiwan as well. The empirical research comprises the quantitative analysis and the interview with many professionals in this field. In the first part of the empirical research, the rate of dismissal of the Superior Court cases and the Supreme Court cases will be proposed respectively, and the differences between the rate of dismissal of cases defended by the legal aid attorneys and common attorneys will be discussed. Besides, the research will perform statistic analysis to indicate the relevance between where the attorney belongs to and the result of judgment. In the second part, the opinion of the interviewers (including judges, prosecutors, attorneys and the staff of the Legal Aid Foundation) will be presented; they will illustrate their specific points from their own professional experiences and weigh the pros and cons of the regulation. To sum up, we hope the results of this thesis can make some significant influence to get the legal aid system improved to ensure that defendants can get effective assistance from the LAF to fulfill the ideal of “ All people are equal before the law”.