【聯合國經濟及社會理事會】刑事案件採用修復式司法基本原則(繁體中文版)

《刑事案件採用修復式司法基本原則》(Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters)

PDF:繁體中文简体中文English

譯者序

聯合國經濟及社會理事會於2002年通過了《刑事案件採用修復式司法基本原則》(Basic Principles on the Use of Restorative Justice Programmes in Criminal Matters,以下簡稱《基本原則》),為各國在刑事司法程序中採用修復式司法提供了重要的指引。這份文件確立了修復式司法的定義、程序、結果,以及使用修復式司法方案時應遵循的基本原則,對於推動全球修復式司法實務的發展具有深遠的影響。

在台灣,修復式司法的概念與實踐也日益受到重視。法務部自2010年起推動「修復式司法試行方案」,並將這些原則納入方案設計的參考依據。2023年修正通過的《犯罪被害人權益保障法》中,更專章訂定了「修復式司法」的相關規範,其立法理由亦明確指出,該章的修法係參酌了這份《基本原則》的精神與架構。足見這份文件對於台灣建立與完善修復式司法制度的重要性。

然而,目前網路上能搜尋到的《基本原則》中文版本,僅有聯合國官方的簡體中文版,其翻譯品質未盡完善,部分專業用詞與台灣法律用語存在明顯差異,例如將「Restorative Justice Programmes」譯為「恢復性司法方案」,而台灣通常譯為「修復式司法方案」;「facilitator」譯為「主持人」,台灣則譯為「促進者」;「restitution」在簡體中文版中未有固定譯法,而台灣則譯為「回復原狀」等,此外,簡體中文的語法結構和表達習慣也與台灣繁體中文有所不同,這些都增加了台灣讀者,特別是法律專業人士理解這份重要文件的難度。且因為是聯合國官方簡體中文版本,台灣民眾在閱讀與應用上可能較為隔閡。

有鑑於此,身為長期關注犯罪被害人權益及修復式司法的實務工作者,筆者深感有必要重新翻譯這份《基本原則》,以提供國人更為精確、流暢且符合台灣法律用語及繁體中文語境的版本。期能透過這份譯文,促進台灣各界對修復式司法的認識與理解,進而推動更為完善的制度設計與實務運作。

本譯文以聯合國英文版本為主要依據,並參照了台灣現行相關法律,特別是《犯罪被害人權益保障法》的用語。在翻譯過程中,筆者力求精準傳達原文意涵,並盡可能使用台灣法律界的通用詞彙,以確保譯文的準確性和可讀性。例如,將「Restorative Justice Programmes」譯為「修復式司法方案」;「Restorative Process」譯為「修復程序」;「Restorative Outcome」譯為「修復性結果」;「facilitator」譯為「促進者」,以符合台灣修復式司法的用語習慣。

本譯文期能協助各界人士更清楚地理解修復式司法的基本精神與具體運作模式,進而促進被害人權益的保障及加害人責任的承擔,並為社會和諧與犯罪預防提供新的思路。如有疏漏或不盡完善之處,敬請各界先進不吝指正賜教,讓本譯文更為周延。

蕭逸民 2025/2/2

刑事案件採用修復式司法基本原則

經濟及社會理事會第2002/12號決議之附件,2002年7月24日通過。

前言

回顧全球範圍內修復式司法倡議顯著增長,

認識到這些倡議往往源自傳統和原住民形式的司法,認為犯罪基本上對人有害,

強調修復式司法是對犯罪不斷演進的回應,尊重每個人的尊嚴和平等,增進理解,通過治癒被害人、加害人和社區來促進社會和諧,

強調這種方法使受犯罪影響的人能夠坦誠分享他們的感受和經歷,目的在滿足他們的需求,

意識到這種方法為被害人提供獲得賠償、感到更安全和追求圓滿結局的機會;讓加害人深入理解其行為的原因和影響,並以有意義的方式承擔責任;使社區能夠認識犯罪的根本原因,促進社區福祉並預防犯罪,

注意到修復式司法衍生出一系列靈活多樣的措施,這些措施能夠因應不同的法律、社會和文化背景,靈活地適應現有的刑事司法制度,並能補充這些制度。

認識到使用修復式司法並不妨害國家對涉嫌加害人的追訴權利,

一、用詞定義

1. 「修復式司法方案」指任何採用修復程序並旨在達成修復性結果的方案。

2. 「修復程序」指被害人與加害人,以及在適當情況下任何其他受犯罪影響的個人或社區成員,通常在促進者的幫助下,共同積極參與解決犯罪所引發問題的任何過程。修復程序可包括調解、和解、會議及審判圈等。

3. 「修復性結果」指透過修復程序達成的協議。修復性結果包括賠償、回復原狀及社區服務等應對措施及方案,旨在滿足當事人個別和共同的需求與責任,實現被害人與加害人重新融入社會。

4. 「當事人」指被害人、加害人及任何其他受犯罪影響並可能參與修復程序的個人或社區成員。

5. 「促進者」指公平且公正地促進當事人參與修復程序的人士。

二、修復式司法方案的使用

6. 修復式司法方案可在刑事司法系統的任何階段使用,須符合國內法律。

7. 修復程序應在有充分證據指控加害人,且被害人和加害人自由和自願同意的前提下,才得以使用。被害人及加害人應能在程序的任何階段撤回同意。協議應自願達成,其中的義務應合理且與案情相稱。

8. 通常情況下,被害人與加害人應就案件的基本事實達成共識,作為參與修復程序的基礎。加害人的參與不應在後續法律程序中被視為認罪的證據。

9. 在將案件移送至修復式程序及進行該程序時,應考慮可能導致權力不平等的差距,以及當事人之間的文化差異。

10. 在將任何案件移送至修復式程序及進行該程序時,應考慮當事人之安全。

11. 若修復程序不合適或不可行,案件應交由刑事司法機關決定如何處理,不得遲延。在此類情況下,刑事司法官員應致力於促進加害人對被害人及受影響的社區承擔責任,並支持被害人及加害人重新融入社會。

三、修復式司法方案的運作

12. 各會員國應考慮制定準則和標準,必要時應經立法機關通過,以規範修復式司法方案的使用。這些準則和標準應尊重本文件所列的基本原則,並應涵蓋以下內容:

(a) 轉介案件至修復式司法方案的條件;

(b) 修復程序後案件的處理方式;

(c) 促進者的資格、培訓及考核;

(d) 修復式司法方案的管理;

(e) 執行修復式司法方案的資格標準及行為規範。

13. 修復式司法方案,尤其是在修復程序中,應適用基本程序保障,確保公正對待加害人和被害人: 

(a) 根據國內法律,被害人及加害人應有權就修復程序諮詢法律顧問,並在需要時獲得翻譯及(或)口譯。此外,未成年人有權得到父母或監護人的協助;

(b) 在同意參與修復程序之前,當事人應充分了解其權利、程序的性質以及其決定可能產生的後果;

(c) 不得強迫或以不公正手段誘使被害人或加害人參與修復程序或接受修復結果。

14. 修復程序中非公開進行的討論應保密,除非經當事人同意或依照國內法律規定,事後不得洩漏。

15. 修復式司法方案所達成的協議結果應在適當情況下接受司法監督或納入司法裁判。此時,結果應與任何其他司法裁判具有相同的法律效力,並不得對相同事實再次起訴。

16. 若當事人未能達成協議,案件應立即回歸既定的刑事司法程序處理,不得遲延。未能達成協議的事實不得在後續的刑事司法程序中作為證據使用。

17. 若在修復程序中達成的協議未能執行,應將案件交由修復方案重新處理,或依國內法律規定,回歸既定的刑事司法程序處理,不得遲延。除司法裁決或判決外,未執行協議不得作為後續刑事司法程序中加重刑罰的理由。

18. 促進者應以公正的態度履行職責,並尊重當事人的尊嚴。促進者應確保當事人彼此尊重,並協助當事人共同找到合適的解決方案。

19. 促進者應充分了解當地文化及社區,並於執行職務前,適當地接受基礎培訓。

四、修復式司法方案的持續發展

20. 各會員國應考慮制定國家戰略和政策,旨在發展修復式司法,並在執法、司法和社政等機關以及地方社區中推廣有利於使用修復式司法的文化。

21. 刑事司法機關與修復式司法方案管理人員應定期進行協商,以增進共同理解,提高修復程序和結果的有效性,擴大修復方案的使用範圍,並探討將修復方法融入刑事司法實務的作法。

22. 會員國應適時與公民社會合作,推動修復式司法方案的研究與評鑑,以便評估這些方案:達成修復性結果的程度;作為刑事司法程序的補充或替代方案的程度;為當事人帶來正面影響的程度。修復式司法程序可能需要隨時間調整其具體形式。因此,各會員國應鼓勵定期評鑑並修改這些方案。研究與評鑑結果應指導未來政策和方案的發展。

五、保留條款

23. 本基本原則的任何內容均不得影響加害人或被害人根據國內法或適用的國際法所享有的任何權利。

Basic principles on the use of restorative justice programmes in criminal matters

Economic and Social Council resolution 2002/12, annex, adopted on 24 July 2002.

Preamble

Recalling that there has been, worldwide, a significant growth of restorative justice initiatives,
Recognizing that those initiatives often draw upon traditional and indigenous forms of justice which view crime as fundamentally harmful to people,
Emphasizing that restorative justice is an evolving response to crime that respects the dignity and equality of each person, builds understanding, and promotes social harmony through the healing of victims, offenders and communities,
Stressing that this approach enables those affected by crime to share openly their feelings and experiences, and aims at addressing their needs,
Aware that this approach provides an opportunity for victims to obtain reparation, feel safer and seek closure; allows offenders to gain insight into the causes and effects of their behaviour and to take responsibility in a meaningful way; and enables communities to understand the underlying causes of crime, to promote community well-being and to prevent crime,
Noting that restorative justice gives rise to a range of measures that are flexible in their adaptation to established criminal justice systems and that complement those systems, taking into account legal, social and cultural circumstances,
Recognizing that the use of restorative justice does not prejudice the right of States to prosecute alleged offenders,

I. Use of terms

1. “Restorative justice programme” means any programme that uses restorative processes and seeks to achieve restorative outcomes.
2. “Restorative process” means any process in which the victim and the offender, and, where appropriate, any other individuals or community members affected by a crime, participate together actively in the resolution of matters arising from the crime, generally with the help of a facilitator. Restorative processes may include mediation, conciliation, conferencing and sentencing circles.
3. “Restorative outcome” means an agreement reached as a result of a restorative process. Restorative outcomes include responses and programmes such as reparation, restitution and community service, aimed at meeting the individual and collective needs and responsibilities of the parties and achieving the reintegration of the victim and the offender.
4. “Parties” means the victim, the offender and any other individuals or community members affected by a crime who may be involved in a restorative process.
5. “Facilitator” means a person whose role is to facilitate, in a fair and impartial manner, the participation of the parties in a restorative process.

II. Use of restorative justice programmes

6. Restorative justice programmes may be used at any stage of the criminal justice system, subject to national law.
7. Restorative processes should be used only where there is sufficient evidence to charge the offender and with the free and voluntary consent of the victim and the offender. The victim and the offender should be able to withdraw such consent at any time during the process. Agreements should be arrived at voluntarily and should contain only reasonable and proportionate obligations.
8. The victim and the offender should normally agree on the basic facts of a case as the basis for their participation in a restorative process. Participation of the offender shall not be used as evidence of admission of guilt in subsequent legal proceedings.
9. Disparities leading to power imbalances, as well as cultural differences among the parties, should be taken into consideration in referring a case to, and in conducting, a restorative process.
10. The safety of the parties shall be considered in referring any case to, and in conducting, a restorative process.
11. Where restorative processes are not suitable or possible, the case should be referred to the criminal justice authorities and a decision should be taken as to how to proceed without delay. In such cases, criminal justice officials should endeavour to encourage the offender to take responsibility vis-à-vis the victim and affected communities, and support the reintegration of the victim and the offender into the community.

III. Operation of restorative justice programmes

12. Member States should consider establishing guidelines and standards, with legislative authority when necessary, that govern the use of restorative justice programmes. Such guidelines and standards should respect the basic principles set forth in the present instrument and should address, inter alia:
(a) The conditions for the referral of cases to restorative justice programmes;
(b) The handling of cases following a restorative process;
(c) The qualifications, training and assessment of facilitators;
(d) The administration of restorative justice programmes;
(e) Standards of competence and rules of conduct governing the operation of restorative justice programmes.
13. Fundamental procedural safeguards guaranteeing fairness to the offender and the victim should be applied to restorative justice programmes and in particular to restorative processes:
(a) Subject to national law, the victim and the offender should have the right to consult with legal counsel concerning the restorative process and, where necessary, to translation and/or interpretation. Minors should, in addition, have the right to the assistance of a parent or guardian;
(b) Before agreeing to participate in restorative processes, the parties should be fully informed of their rights, the nature of the process and the possible consequences of their decision;
(c) Neither the victim nor the offender should be coerced, or induced by unfair means, to participate in restorative processes or to accept restorative outcomes.
14. Discussions in restorative processes that are not conducted in public should be confidential, and should not be disclosed subsequently, except with the agreement of the parties or as required by national law.
15. The results of agreements arising out of restorative justice programmes should, where appropriate, be judicially supervised or incorporated into judicial decisions or judgements. Where that occurs, the outcome should have the same status as any other judicial decision or judgement and should preclude prosecution in respect of the same facts.
16. Where no agreement is reached among the parties, the case should be referred back to the established criminal justice process and a decision as to how to proceed should be taken without delay. Failure to reach an agreement alone shall not be used in subsequent criminal justice proceedings.
17. Failure to implement an agreement made in the course of a restorative process should be referred back to the restorative programme or, where required by national law, to the established criminal justice process and a decision as to how to proceed should be taken without delay. Failure to implement an agreement, other than a judicial decision or judgement, should not be used as justification for a more severe sentence in subsequent criminal justice proceedings.
18. Facilitators should perform their duties in an impartial manner, with due respect to the dignity of the parties. In that capacity, facilitators should ensure that the parties act with respect towards each other and enable the parties to find a relevant solution among themselves.
19. Facilitators shall possess a good understanding of local cultures and communities and, where appropriate, receive initial training before taking up facilitation duties.

IV. Continuing development of restorative justice programmes

20. Member States should consider the formulation of national strategies and policies aimed at the development of restorative justice and at the promotion of a culture favourable to the use of restorative justice among law enforcement, judicial and social authorities, as well as local communities.
21. There should be regular consultation between criminal justice authorities and administrators of restorative justice programmes to develop a common understanding and enhance the effectiveness of restorative processes and outcomes, to increase the extent to which restorative programmes are used, and to explore ways in which restorative approaches might be incorporated into criminal justice practices.
22. Member States, in cooperation with civil society where appropriate, should promote research on and evaluation of restorative justice programmes to assess the extent to which they result in restorative outcomes, serve as a complement or alternative to the criminal justice process and provide positive outcomes for all parties. Restorative justice processes may need to undergo change in concrete form over time. Member States should therefore encourage regular evaluation and modification of such programmes. The results of research and evaluation should guide further policy and programme development.

V. Saving clause

23. Nothing in these basic principles shall affect any rights of an offender or a victim which are established in national law or applicable international law.

留言