English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 20 |  Items with full text/Total items : 90029/119959 (75%)
Visitors : 24035248      Online Users : 100
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/97983


    Title: 論待遣送外國人合憲收容要件 ——預防性拘禁觀點
    Authors: 林超駿;陳長文
    Lin, Chao-Chun;Chen, Charng-Ven
    Keywords: 待遣送外國人之收容;人身自由;正當法律程序;不定期拘禁;司法違憲審查
    Detention in the Removal Process;Personal Liberty;Due Process of Law;Indefinite Detention;Judicial Review
    Date: 2012-02
    Issue Date: 2016-06-17 11:11:49 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 現行入出國及移民法中有關待遣送外國人收容要件之規定,基本上是有所不足者,不僅要件寬鬆,而且未針對外國人驅逐出國程序不同階段,而為細緻之規定。而此不足原因在於,現行入出國及移民法收容要件概括,是忽略了人身自由受限實體要件為整體正當法律程序建構之一環;另外,收容要件之粗略,是忽視了人身自由需更為精緻分類之必要性,也就是從客觀上承認預防性人身自由限制之類型,以及從主觀上區分外國人種類之重要性。從當下實證法規定之角度看,現行有關待遣送外國人收容要件之規範,於待遣送外國人第一階段定期收容之部分,問題主要在於要件、與期間規定均不夠細緻,皆有過猶不及之憾;而六十天收容規定,則有稍短之嫌,不僅可能與遣送所需作業時間有違,且易形成不定期收容。至於就第二階段不定期收容期間言,除以「必要時」作為要件過於寬鬆外,最嚴重問題在於,於現行外國人收容制度下可能形成真正不定期人身自由限制,然此種結果,往往是由於不可歸責於當事人之事由,也就是因遣送作業無法順利達成之故。對此,本文參酌美國最高法院於Zadvysas v. Davis等案之見解,建議予以改善。
    The current system of removing foreigners in Taiwan has serious defects in terms of substantive due process jurisprudence. On the one hand, the criteria that are used to determine whether foreigners should be removed are neither specific nor clear. Therefore, foreigners put on a list for removal are forced to confront extreme uncertainty. On the other hand, foreigners awaiting removal face a possibility of indefinite detention and are put in a very difficult situation. This paper stresses the fact that, in borrowing from the experience of US law, we should divide the removal process into different phases. In the first stage, we should not only make the criteria much clearer but also reduce the length of the detention period. In the second stage, more justification should be required for indefinite detention, and a system of regular review of the situation of indefinite detention of foreigners should be established.
    Relation: 法學評論125,193-286頁
    Chengchi law review
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[法學評論 TSSCI] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    125(193-286).pdf1273KbAdobe PDF168View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback