改良式當事人進行主義下之律師權與實質有效辯護

Abstract

我國刑事訴訟制度為改進舊制職權主義下，法官須全程主導證據調查、主動蒐集對被告不利之證據等審判者與追訴者混淆之現象，於民國九十二年修法改採改良式當事人進行主義。此一新制之設計釐清法官與檢察官的權責分際，開啟了法官中立聽審之門，然而，也因為法官與檢察官於新制下各司其職，法庭之證據調查活動改由當事人主導，當事人兩造武器之對等成為落實公平審判不可或缺的前提要件，而被告之辯護人則是被告唯一擁有、得以與檢方相抗的武器，因此兩造當事人是否武器對等、訴訟程序是否公平，端賴被告之辯護人是否確實為被告為實質有效之辯護與協助。 然而，自新制實施以來，我國就此議題並未有深入之學術著作或實證研究，因此，本文嘗試以觀察我國實務見解之角度出發，檢視我國律師於刑事訴訟程序中為被告辯護之情形，藉以觀察新制下，當事人兩造之武器是否對等、訴訟是否具備公平審判之制度，並以此檢視新制改革之成效。 為達成上述研究目的，本文透過整理我國學者之教科書、期刊、國內碩士論文及美國聯邦最高法院之判決與期刊文章，以介紹、說明我國改良式當事人進行主義與被告律師權之制度背景。進而，再透過以我國最高法院為主，高等法院為輔之判決整理，以觀察、呈現我國修法實施新制後之實務於起訴前及起訴後之各重要階段中，辯護人未能實質有效辯護之問題為何，並比較實行當事人進行主義制度之美國面對此問題之聯邦最高法院判決與學說見解，以作為我國解決此一問題時之參考。最後，並站在當事人立場，思考辯護人未盡實質有效辯護之執業義務時，當事人可主張何種救濟方式以保障其權利，並藉以提升我國律師之執業環境，以因應改良式當事人進行主義下辯護人角色日益重要之變化。

To avoid the judges taking the roles of both the judge and the prosecutor inevitably in the old criminal procedure, Taiwan’s criminal procedure has transformed into reformed adversarial system in 2003. This new system clarifies the duties of the judge and the prosecutor respectively and has opened the door of fair trial. However, once the judge no longer takes the whole responsibility to dig out the fact under the new system, the parties will assume the responsibility instead, that is, the prosecutor and the defendant have to go all out to attack and defend for the fact-finding. In this condition, the attorney’s effective assistance becomes the crucial prerequisite to a fair trial because the attorney is the defendant’s sole weapon in the criminal procedure to fight off the prosecutor’s accusation against him. Since there is not much discussion nor much empirical research on this issue in Taiwan, whether the attorneys in Taiwan have fulfilled their responsibility to offer effective assistance to the defendants remains an question to be found out. This thesis therefore aims at observing the practices of Taiwan’s attorneys in criminal procedures by searching the judgments so as to see whether the defendants’ right to a fair trial has been achieved through the new system. To achieve the objective above, first, the thesis introduces the background of the reformed adversarial system and the defendant’s right to counsel by extracting and summarizing the textbooks, the articles, the thesis and the judgments of the U.S. Supreme Court. Second, this thesis presents the situations and points out the issues that the attorneys could not offer effective assistance to the defendants in the crucial stages, whether before trial or after trial, by searching the judgments of the Supreme Court of Taiwan and Taiwan High Court, and also by illustrating the viewpoints of the U.S. Supreme Court and related journals. Finally, in the event of the attorney’s malpractice, the thesis introduces the responsibilities the attorney may assume and the remedies the defendant may adopt so as to protect his own right and to improve the legal practice environment under the new reformed adversarial system.