財經犯罪之偵查、審判與執行─以檢察權行使為核心

Abstract

大規模的財經犯罪為近年各國在維護內國經濟秩序上，最為棘手、難以處理的問題，尤其在全球化下，此類財經犯罪的集團化、專業性、涉案金額高、受害者眾、被害感稀薄等特性，更加上跨越疆界的流動性，均為傳統在地的暴力或財產犯罪之所無。近年來，我國所發生的財經犯罪牽涉層面甚廣（如紅火、二次金改案），犯罪金額高達數十甚至數百億（如博達、力霸案）。自2000年迄今，重大財經犯罪起訴金額近3000億新台幣，不但影響金融及證券市場的交易秩序，更影響產業與經濟的發展，導致投資人血本無歸、企業員工失業、金融重建基金虧損、削弱台灣的國際競爭力，可謂吞噬國本。財經犯罪的行為人多具有學經歷及財富等優勢，除在實體法上就各該犯罪構成要件重新思考外，如何就此種犯罪犯罪加以追訴審判、以有效遏止該種犯罪不法剝奪人民財產權，乃本研究欲探討之核心。 台灣由於國際地位特殊，大規模的財經犯罪的行為人一旦逃亡、或犯罪所得一旦移轉至海外，往往追緝困難，造成社會重大損失，刑事正義無由落實。而財經犯罪上開不同於傳統犯罪的特徵，更造成司法人員在追訴犯人、蒐集證據、認定犯罪及執行刑罰上，遭遇重重阻礙。作為打擊財經犯罪的檢察官，有負責偵查、蒐集罪證、行使國家的強制處分權，確保證據及沒收標的存在的任務，故前述財經犯罪特徵對遏止犯罪的負面影響，在檢察官行使職權、執行職務之時最為顯著。 我國探討檢察的偵查及裁量權限時，往往著重於傳統犯罪，在傳統犯罪的偵審中，檢察官固為國家公權力代表，與不諳法律的被告間，具有實力的落差，因此過去對檢察權的討論，多偏向監督其行使，並強化被告的防禦權，為事理之當然。惟大規模的財經犯罪不同於傳統犯罪，行為人往往非富即貴，在世界各國均有銀行帳戶，不但有能力聘請各領域的專業人士為其進行司法程序中的防禦，更有能力將金錢與自身流轉至國外，隱匿犯罪所得，如何給予檢察官多元的武器，以因應此類利用財經身分地位優勢進行的犯罪，實為當務之急。 本計畫認為，我國刑事檢察權的行使，應因應犯罪型態的不同，重新調整檢察官的職權、給予檢察官更多的判斷、裁量空間以及更多元的偵察犯罪工具有關。尤其台灣外交處境的艱難，導致我國與他國的司法互助資源稀少，而財經犯罪的跨國特性，使得我國檢察官在追訴此等犯罪時，更須注重時效性。 然而，刑事作為最後的手段性，必須謹慎發動，一旦為因應大規模財經犯罪而擴大某些檢察權行使，更必須建立相關監督的機制，以免濫行偵查訴追的發生。何況商業活動有其當下專業判斷的必要，司法究屬後見之明，在判斷犯罪嫌疑是否足以發動偵查時，更需建立明確準則，以免檢察權的行使造成經濟活動的負面干擾。 申請人將在本計畫中，以實證及比較法方法，參酌美國近年來關於檢察權與預防財經犯罪理論之發展，全盤探討、建構追訴財經犯罪行為的刑事程序法制，以期能整合財經法與刑法、實體法與程序法，繼先前的財經刑法研究後，得進行程序法面的研究。

How to prevent and combat large-scale financial crimes has become the most critical criminal issue in many countries. Large-scale financial crimes not only cause a huge damage to the economy but also create the most influential and powerful criminal defendants in the criminal justice system. The prosecutor, an important figure in the Taiwanese criminal law justice system faces multiple challenges to combat financial crimes. Unlike the US, where prosecutors embrace multiple powerful weapons to combat white collar and corporate crimes, Taiwan’s prosecutors lacking of a comprehensive infrastructure including the well-established policing and regulation law and policies, effective mutual legal assistance treaties, and most important, enough prosecutorial discretion power, many white collar and corporate criminals who commit serious financial crimes are hard to be prosecuted and adjudicated by the Taiwanese criminal law systems. Moreover, due to the difficult diplomatic position in the global society, Taiwan is not able to join in United Nations and many other formal international societies; nor does Taiwan have enough extradition and mutual legal assistance treaties with other countries. Financial criminals who fled to overseas - many of them are now hidden in the US or China- are hardly to be arrested and extradited. The illegal proceeds and stolen assets are also hardly to be recovered or forfeited, either, under such an unfortunate circumstance. However, if Taiwan wants to enlarge the prosecutor’s investigation and discretion power in combating large-scale financial crimes, the check-and-balance mechanism should also be established in case the abuse of the prosecutorial power. This research would like to apply the empirical and comparative methods to analyze the prosecutorial power in combating financial crimes. Following the prior research project which focused on the substantive criminal law against financial crimes, this research will center on the criminal procedure rules and the enforcement. To review the status qua about the policy and law against financial crimes, this research hopes to reconstruct the role of prosecutor and to respond the challenges of financial crimes in the contemporary Taiwanese society.