法學期刊.
  • 社群分享
論著名稱: 人性、情理、法意-親親相隱的傳統與當代(Human Nature, Ethical Reasoning and Legal Principle: The Past and Present of the Immunity of Mutual Concealment among Relatives)
編著譯者: 黃源盛
出版日期: 2016.06
刊登出處: 台灣/法制史研究第 29 期 /153-199 頁
頁  數: 38 點閱次數: 2693
下載點數: 152 點 銷售明細: 權利金查詢 變更售價
授 權 者: 黃源盛
關 鍵 詞: 親親相隱親屬拒絕證言晚清民國刑法情理法
中文摘要: 人民有違法行為,從「法律之前,人人平等」的立法精神來講,不宜因身分關係而有不同的對待,自應鼓勵其他人民告發,但就人性掙扎的價值抉擇言,則或不然?此時,該何去何從?這是耐人尋味而值得深思的課題。而揆諸中國歷代法制規範,自漢以迄清末,有關親親相隱制幾乎代代相沿,少有更動;至於民國台灣百年多來的刑事法中仍多所保留,甚至外國絕大多數國家的立法例,似乎也選擇了親親得相為容隱的立法政策,何以致之?
值得探討的是,親親相隱制起源的歷史背景為何?容隱制進入刑律規範的立意何在?容隱制存在於傳統中國及當代的民國刑法,垂二千餘年而不輟,其根本原因是什麼?1949 年以後同屬華人文化圈的中國大陸何以捨棄親屬容隱制?今後的走向會是如何?以比較立法例的觀念看來,容隱制的社會意義和價值是什麼?從兩岸華人社會最近的修法動向又如何理解家族倫理與國民義務之間的消長關係?凡此大哉之問,本文試著從刑法文化史與當代刑事法學的觀點,一方面著重在規範流變的史實描述,另一方面從史觀詮釋其背後的理論基礎,並尋繹其歷史與時代的雙重意義。
英文關鍵詞: immunity of mutual concealment among relativesright to refuse testimonycriminal code of the late Qingcriminal code of ROCQing Li Fa
英文摘要: According to the principle of legal equality, the law shall not only be free from differential treatments, but also actively encourage people to report or testify criminal offences. However, contradictorily, it seemed to be against the Human Nature to ask people turning in the criminals who are related to them. Seeking a proper solution to these interest conflicts has always been an appealing and worth pondering issue. From Han to the late Qing, the legal immunity of mutual concealment among relatives was hardly touched throughout dynasties, and kept remaining in the subsequent criminal laws of the Republic. Similarly, most of the countries in the modern world have also established comparable legislative policies as well. There shall be a pervasive interpretation to these legal phenomena.
This article shall trace the origins and foundations of such legal immunity in the Chinese legal history, figuring out how did it survived for more than two thousand years and remain effective in Taiwan today; and why did PRC once abandon it after 1949 but reopen the discussion nowadays? Additionally, in the perspective of comparative law, what are the social meanings and merits of such immunity in Western and Chinese legal culture? How do we explain the related amendments and ethical transitions across Taiwan Straight in recent years? To answer all these questions, I shall reconstruct several historical facts to restore the evolving process of the norms. Furthermore, I shall also interpret the theoretical basis, historiographical meaning and epoch significance underneath those historical facts.
目  次: 壹、序言—兩則歷久彌新的法理公案
貳、傳統中國親親相隱的歷史考察
一、漢代董仲舒春秋折獄親親相隱案例
二、《唐律》親親相隱原則的立法化
三、明清時期的親親相隱與干名犯義
參、晚清以降華人社會親親相隱的承與變
一、清末變法修律親親相隱的爭而不爭
二、民國台灣有關親親相隱的百年進程
肆、從比較立法例看家族倫理與國民義務的關係
一、有關歐陸法系國家親親相隱的法規範
二、有關英美法系國家親親相隱的法規範及實務運作
伍、親親相隱的理論基礎及其歷史與時代意義
一、儒家家族倫理思想法律化的理念與價值
二、當代刑法中的期待可能性理論與親親相隱
陸、結論
相關法條:
相關判解:
相關函釋:
    相關論著:
      返回功能列