参审法庭组成理论及表决原则之关联性-东海大学法律学院.DOCVIP

公民參與刑事審判下公平法院理念之研究－從參與審判法庭組成與表決法則論起 莊杏茹＊ 目 次 壹、前言 貳、公民參與審判之參與資格與選任 一、參與資格 二、拒卻制度 參、公民參與審判法庭成員比例與表決原則 一、參審法庭結構配置分析 二、無罪推定與表決原則論理 肆、公民參與刑事審判與無罪推定 一、公民與法官共同擔保表決結果 二、公民參審法庭組成與表決原則之意義 三、無罪推定暨參審法庭組成與表決原則之關聯性 伍、結論 中文關鍵詞： 公民參與刑事審判、正當法律程序、公平審判、比例原則、附理由拒卻、不附理由拒卻、無罪推定、二重危險、不對稱上訴 Key Words： Citizen Participation in Criminal Trial, Due Process of Law, Fair Trial, Principle of Proportionality, Challenge for Cause, Peremptory Challenge, Presumption of Innocence, Double Jeopardy, Asymmetric Appeal 摘要 無罪推定被承認為普世價值，如何合理詮釋，使之具體實踐，並受接納是刑事審判的重要使命。透過公民參與刑事審判，使公民面對開示於審判庭的適格證據，與法官同議，依合理的表決原則，踐行正當程序，擔保無罪推定，其意義是參與人數以大數法則表現客觀擔保。參審法庭之組成與參審員職權定位問題，反應國家格局，也看出各法域考量的司法利益不同，法定參與人數使證據評價有效，以表決原則擔保判決可受確信，有其實踐意義。我國刑事審判方略，應本於國家、社會與個人如何認識、實踐公平審判與無罪推定的重點，依比例原則規範公民參與人數、表決方式，定位公民參與刑事審判制度，尊重社會價值對公義判決據評價之認定，權利救濟之衡平，與被害人及其家屬社會心理療癒過程中面對司法的態度，本於憲法第8條正當程序內涵，使第一審獲判無罪的被告不再暴露於國家追訴風險之下，當是我國刑事訴訟第二審再造應思考的問題，更是國家司法聯結公民社會實踐無罪推定的合理基礎。 Abstract The presumption of innocence is widely recognized as universal value. It is altogether important when the precisely interpretation and practice of the principle came to be accepted in criminal trial. Tailoring the system for citizen participation in criminal trial, evidence would be handled best before mixed court that judges and citizens made legal decision by reasonable voting rule with deliberation to safeguard the presumption of innocence and due process. It becomes particular meaningful to due process in practice, presumption of innocence together with the configuration of mixed court rational and fair trial guaranteed. Mixed court configuration and restriction of the availability of citizen participation in criminal proceedings governed by policy that may presented the various judicial interests in different jurisdictions. The issue of reasonable mixed court size and rule of voting provided reliable proof and the safeguard of trial outcome after communicative decision-making process. Our legal policy need to be conducted by the point of views on how the presumption o