Pink Sheets Stock 粉單市場(粉單交易市場)閱讀筆記
美國對於未達上市(櫃)標準之公開發行公司，在既有之上市、上櫃證券市場之外，另建立一未上市、未上櫃的報價系統，使該等公司亦能有一合法便利之籌資場所。
美國於1990年在店頭市場下設立「佈告欄股票市場」(Over-the-counter Bulletin Board；簡稱 OTC Bulletin Board, 或OTCBB,亦稱場外股票的報價指示)以提供未上市(櫃)之報價。
OTCBB之沿革:
OTCBB於1990年6月成立，成立之初為一實驗性市場，目的係為在現行的店頭市場中另建立一交易市場提供未上市(櫃)公司報價，以健全店頭市場，並使未上市(櫃)股票報價透明化。依據「1990年潘尼股票改革法」(Penny Stock Reform Act of 1990)授權美國「證券交易委員會」 (SEC)建立一個符合1934年證券交易法第17B規定之電子系統，以協助公開報價及顯示最近成交價資訊。
1998.4 OTCBB在修正相關制度後，經SEC准脫離實驗階段成為一個常態性市場，並允許在SEC註冊的所有美國國外證券及「美國存託憑證」可在OTCBB顯示即時報價、最近成交價格與交易量資訊。
三、OTCBB之發行制度
(一)報價資格
OTCBB主要為提供無法正式在美國上市上櫃的公司能有合法、良好之交易市場，以藉此提高該公司股票之流通性及知名度，故對於申請報價的公司在設立年限與財務狀況並無要求須達一定標準。
雖然OTCBB並無任何申請門檻限制，但所有欲在OTCBB報價之證券必須由至少一位以上之「市場創造者」(Market Maker，以下簡稱MM)推薦。
而此所謂的MM，是指在OTCBB交易之自營商，其必須是「全美證券商協會」 (National Association Securities Dealers)之會員，且符合「全美證券商協會」對證券自營商所要求之財務與業務經營之規定，並具有Nasdaq第二代工作站設備，及符合1934年證券交易法Rule 15c2-11之規定，即可擔任OTCBB的MM。
(二)報價證券之規定
目前於OTCBB報價之證券主要為美國國內權益證券、國外權益證券及「美國存託憑證」(American Depository Receipt)。欲在OTCBB報價之證券除必須遵守「OTCBB合格規定」外，尚須符合下列之條件：
1.美國國內權益證券，其必須是：(1)未在美國全國性證券交易所與Nasdaq市場掛牌之證券。而美國目前經SEC核准設立之全國性證券交易所計有美國證券交易所(American Stock Exchange)、紐約證券交易所(New York Stock Exchange)等二個全國性證券交易所，基本上只要其非在該二個交易所與Nasdaq市場掛牌之證券，均可在OTCBB掛牌交易；或(2)在美國各地區區域性證券交易所上市或交易的證券；或(3)因未符合Nasdaq市場上櫃標準而遭到下市之證券；或(4)經「市場創造者」填妥Form 15c2-11豁免表格後之「粉紅單交易系統」 (Pink Sheet)報價之證券；或(5)從紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所下市者；或(6)在紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所暫停交易者或
2.國外權益證券或「美國存託憑證」，其必須是： (1) 未在美國全國性證券交易所與Nasdaq市場掛牌；或(2)在區域性證券交易所掛牌買賣者；或(3)從紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所下市者；或(4)在紐約證券交易所或美國證券交易所暫停交易者。
(三)報價證券之等級
依據MM參與報價之程度，於OTCBB報價之證券可分為不適任證券、適任證券與活絡證券三種等級。
1.不適任證券(Ineligible Securities)：所有目前尚未於OTCBB報價之OTC證券均被視為是不適任證券。此不適任證券必須有市場創造者提出一份Form 211或一份15c2-11的豁免表格(15c2-ll Exemption Form)，在經過OTC主管單位核可後，該證券才具備「適任的」(eligible)地位。
2.適任證券(Eligible Securities)：若某一證券屬於適任證券，即表示有一個或一個以上的MM取得許可，能夠於取得許可後的30日內在OTCBB系統上對該證券進行報價。任何其他的MM若欲對該證券進行報價時，則必須填寫一份完整的Form 211。
3.活絡證券(Active Securities)：「全美證券商協會」對於適任證券於其30天的適任期間內，將會對該適任證券實施「經常性報價測試」 (a frequency-of-quotation test)，以確認該適任證券之交易是否活絡。此所謂「經常性報價測試」為經紀商或自營商在30日的適任期間內，是否對一適任證券在自營商間的報價系統上進行公開報價，並至少有12個交易日，且沒有連續四個交易日以上未進行報價。如果通過此測試，則該適任證券即被認可為活絡證券，任何的MM可適用Rule 15c2-11豁免規定，能自由參與報價而無須預先填寫Form 211。然如果未通過此測試，則此所謂「經常性報價測試」為經紀商或自營商在三十天的適任期間內，是否對一適任證券在自營商間的報價系統上，進行公開報價，並至少有十二個交易日，且沒有連續四個交易日以上未進行報價。若符合此一標準，則該適任證券即被認可為活絡證券，任何的「市場創造者」可適用Rule 15c2-11豁免規定，能自由參與報價而無須預先填寫Form 211。
(四)申請報價程序
1.發行公司有一MM對其進行推薦，並填寫Form 211表格；或
2.符合Rule 15c2-11 豁免(Exemption)之規定，填寫豁免表(Exemption Form)。MM於公開報價的前三天，須向「全美證券商協會」之OTC主管單位(The NASD OTC Compliance Unit)提出一份Form 211正本及有關發行資訊的影印本兩份。當完成上述之許可程序，Nasdaq之「Nasdaq市場資料庫系統」(Nasdaq Market Data Integrity)將會通知該MM，其已完成某一證券之登錄，並即可開始輸入報價。
( 下載:PDF OTC_BullBoard_Form 211 表格)申請後，OTC Compliance Unit約於10天左右(或更快)回文，會見到NASD要求更進一步的公司交易安全性說明、提供更多的文件資料、財務狀況、股東名冊(含名稱、地址、發行日)、股東名冊正確性說明、專利商標狀況、是否與上市公司有關、CEO的disciplinary history。所以，報價標準雖然遠比上市櫃公司低，實際上也不是很容易申請。
(五)維持交易規定
OTCBB對於報價交易之發行公司並無最少掛牌股數要求，但若欲維持在OTCBB交易，必須至少要有一MM對其進行報價並符合「OTCBB合格規定」(The OTCBB Eligibility Rule)。「OTCBB合格規定」係於1999.1.4經SEC核准實施，要求凡是於OTCBB報價之證券須向SEC、往來銀行或保險機構揭露其財務資訊，並將此資訊經由「電子資料收集、分析及查詢系統」 (Electronic Data Gathering , Analysis and Retrieval；EDGAR))向投資大眾公開。並要求在1999.1.4前已在OTCBB報價而尚未揭示訊息之公司的股票，以一年的緩衝期進行調整，自2000.7.1起所有在OTCBB報價交易的公司，必須逐步完全揭露當前的財務資訊以符合「OTCBB合格規定」。
四、OTCBB之交易制度
特色即是由MM參與。
MM在證券市場上的主要工作，在於以自營商身份自行買賣相關之有價證券，使市場交易可以順利進行。MM藉由在OTCBB報價系統上分別揭示某一股票欲買進的買進報價(bid)及欲賣出的賣出報價(ask)兩種價位，以揭示的價格進行交易，以活絡市場之交易。
交易方式：
(一)報價方式
MM報價之方式有兩種：1.確定報價(priced)：可以採只報買價、只報賣價的單邊報價方式，或買、賣價均報的雙邊報價方式；2.不確定報價(unpriced)：即採不定明價格，僅表示買賣之意願，而徵求買方回報其欲買入之價格(bid wanted)或賣方回報其欲賣出價格(offer wanted)，藉以吸引賣單或買單。
(二)報價單位
在報價申報數量上，OTCBB對報價設有最小報價單位之規定，因此MM的報價單位須滿足某一最低數量的要求。SEC於2000.9.5核准「全美證券商協會」Rule 6750的修正案，將OTCBB報價中每股超過美金200元以上之最低報價數量，由舊有之五個級距，多增加區分四個級距，而成為九個級距。
(三)交易成本
於OTCBB報價之發行公司無須繳交費用給MM，但MM須依據每月平均部位(positions)數向OTCBB繳交費用。由於「市場創造者」只要於系統上報價一次即稱為一個部位，因此每月MM預向OTCBB繳交之系統費用，係將當月報價次數之總和，除以當月交易天數得出當月平均部位數，再將計算出的當月平均部位數乘上一部位六美元費用，即為MM之成本。
五、資訊揭露與監視制度
(一)資訊揭露方式
1.市場交易資訊揭露
OTCBB經由「市場資訊商」 (Market Data Vendor)的終端機與全球資訊網站(Web Sites)，向全球的客戶揭示下列資訊：
(1)美國國內證券、國外證券及「美國存託憑證」最新成交價與成交量資訊；
(2)「直接參與計畫」每日最高價、最低價、收盤價以及成交量資訊；
(3)個別MM的買價、賣價以及股份數(indications of interest)之報價資訊；
(4)證券商間對於美國國內證券、國外證券及「美國存託憑證」的內部報價(inside quotes)；
(5)「直接參與計畫」的試探性報價；
(6)MM的電話號碼。所有訂購使用Nasdaq第二代工作站的公司以及MM，皆能夠在其工作站上看到所有OTCBB的資訊而無須額外付費。
2.公司資訊揭露
於OTCBB報價之發行公司無須向主管機關「全美證券商協會」或其子公司The Nasdaq Stock Market公司繳送任何報告，但其推薦證券商須檢送由發行公司編制的定期性財務報告給SEC或其他的管理單位。
因在OTCBB報價交易僅須一MM推薦即可，因此其投資風險相對較上市、上櫃公司為高，故SEC要求在OTCBB報價交易的公司亦應充分揭露其資訊，以保障投資大眾，並有助於市場規模之擴大。
資料來源:
1.林江峰、陳怡如,美國未上市(櫃)股票交易制度之簡析
2.SEC
3.美國商會
4.Pink Sheets - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
5.NASD Rules: NASD Manual
6.OTCBB有關的法規: http://www.otcbb.com/AboutOTCBB/rulesindex.stm
WANLI YANG
2008.7.19
2008年7月19日 星期六
2008年7月11日 星期五
Guantanamo Bay News
Guantanamo Bay News
美國聯邦最高法院上個月在華盛頓DC判決認定Guantanamo Bay的人犯( Enemy Combatants)享有憲法保障之權利後，目前已經有數百位律師準備好要代表這些人犯展開訴訟了。以往這些案件都在相關軍事法庭審理，一般法院無法審理這些案件，也將因此判決而有不同，該聯邦最高法院
判決認為人犯就其囚禁問題，可以在美國一般法院裡面提出相關之訴訟。
以往律師因為都必須聘請翻譯人員、長時間工作，以及長途飛行前往古巴該基地進行訴訟，因此鮮少有律師願意承接這類案件，故以 Guantanamo Bay Bar Association都必須靠募款來進行，所以相對於2002開始時根本沒有律師願意接這種案件的情形，將在聯邦最高法院判決後做大幅改變，目前對大型律師事務所而言，巨額利益可期，因此各大律師事務所都開始擠著要代表這些人犯了。
911之後，NGOs組織約只有5位律師，目前這些組織人力都是原來的三倍了。
同時間，美國司法部( DOJ )也開始準備增加人力開始應戰，從目前僅有5位檢察官處理Guantanamo Bay人犯案件的情形，DOJ已經打算增加該部門人力至50位了。
專家認為DOJ突然間面對這個判決，突如而來的情形，如果每個訴訟都有律師代表人犯，因為可預期會有很多的案件、大量的 motion，DOJ可能無法如以往一般聘請 Private lawyers來代表政府打這些訴訟，DOJ如何面對這種情形，恐怕是一個非常大的挑戰。
PS:美國最高法院2008年6月12日( United States Supreme Court )在 Boumediene v. Bush 案件中，認為 Guantanamo Bay裡面的人犯( "enemy combatants")，享有憲法保障( captives were entitled to the protection of the United States Constitution)，該案以5比4，而由 Anthony Kennedy大法官代表同意意見之法官表示CSR軍事法庭( the CSR Tribunals)不適當( "inadequate"不適格)。
資料來源: Ari Shapiro, Guantanamo: Calling All Lawyers, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92426959, reviewed 11/7/2008.
July 10, 2008 · When the Supreme Court ruled that detainees at Guantanamo Bay have constitutional rights, an already massive litigation effort grew even larger. Defense attorneys and government lawyers are preparing for a huge volume of work.
News of Guantanamo Bay Bar Association: http://nymag.com/news/features/17337/
Prisoners held as “enemy combatants” at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba can immediately file habeas corpus petitions in US district courts challenging the legality of their confinement.
By Wan-Li Yang
11/7/2008
美國聯邦最高法院上個月在華盛頓DC判決認定Guantanamo Bay的人犯( Enemy Combatants)享有憲法保障之權利後，目前已經有數百位律師準備好要代表這些人犯展開訴訟了。以往這些案件都在相關軍事法庭審理，一般法院無法審理這些案件，也將因此判決而有不同，該聯邦最高法院
判決認為人犯就其囚禁問題，可以在美國一般法院裡面提出相關之訴訟。
以往律師因為都必須聘請翻譯人員、長時間工作，以及長途飛行前往古巴該基地進行訴訟，因此鮮少有律師願意承接這類案件，故以 Guantanamo Bay Bar Association都必須靠募款來進行，所以相對於2002開始時根本沒有律師願意接這種案件的情形，將在聯邦最高法院判決後做大幅改變，目前對大型律師事務所而言，巨額利益可期，因此各大律師事務所都開始擠著要代表這些人犯了。
911之後，NGOs組織約只有5位律師，目前這些組織人力都是原來的三倍了。
同時間，美國司法部( DOJ )也開始準備增加人力開始應戰，從目前僅有5位檢察官處理Guantanamo Bay人犯案件的情形，DOJ已經打算增加該部門人力至50位了。
專家認為DOJ突然間面對這個判決，突如而來的情形，如果每個訴訟都有律師代表人犯，因為可預期會有很多的案件、大量的 motion，DOJ可能無法如以往一般聘請 Private lawyers來代表政府打這些訴訟，DOJ如何面對這種情形，恐怕是一個非常大的挑戰。
PS:美國最高法院2008年6月12日( United States Supreme Court )在 Boumediene v. Bush 案件中，認為 Guantanamo Bay裡面的人犯( "enemy combatants")，享有憲法保障( captives were entitled to the protection of the United States Constitution)，該案以5比4，而由 Anthony Kennedy大法官代表同意意見之法官表示CSR軍事法庭( the CSR Tribunals)不適當( "inadequate"不適格)。
資料來源: Ari Shapiro, Guantanamo: Calling All Lawyers, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92426959, reviewed 11/7/2008.
July 10, 2008 · When the Supreme Court ruled that detainees at Guantanamo Bay have constitutional rights, an already massive litigation effort grew even larger. Defense attorneys and government lawyers are preparing for a huge volume of work.
News of Guantanamo Bay Bar Association: http://nymag.com/news/features/17337/
Prisoners held as “enemy combatants” at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba can immediately file habeas corpus petitions in US district courts challenging the legality of their confinement.
By Wan-Li Yang
11/7/2008
Taiwan Forfeiture Procedure
The Challenge of Taiwan Forfeiture Procedure
Background
Financial crime is growing problem in Taiwan. To divest such criminals of their ill-gotten gains is one of our main goals and one method of reducing the incentive to carry our these financial crime.
In Taiwan, statutes provide at least two ways, non-judicial and judicial, to implement the forfeiture procedure. For example, customs officers have the authority to forfeit the illegal or smuggled products at the border and prosecutor office won't be involved. On the other hand, once the case involves judicial procedure, either criminal or civil action is available to prosecutors.
It is common for weapon and illegal drugs to be confiscated through criminal procedure. Once the prosecutor can prove a connection between the criminal and property, and once the defendant has been convicted, weapons, illegal drugs and even means of transport are usually forfeited following the written judgment. The law enforcement division of each district prosecutors' office is responsible for enforcing the written judgment. This is the traditional way to deal with property which has been illegally gained or used by the criminals. However, it is insufficient to meet the challenge of changing financial world situation, let alone investigation and confiscated property which had been hidden abroad. For example, in Taiwan little real estate has been forfeited through criminal procedure, and few civil cases has been filed to confiscate the relevant real estate. This is why the authority is eager to see how the procedure works in practice in the foreign stage
In practice, for example, in Taiwan a criminal conviction in which the defendant had been charged and confiscation has been requested requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The criminal confiscation process requires a person must already have been charged with an offence. Upon written conviction, the law enforcement division applies for a permanent confiscation of the property derived from the offence concerned.
In Taiwan, immunity is not allowed in criminal procedure. However, at the pretrial stage dismissal, deferral, plea bargaining and suspended prosecution are all available to the prosecutor. These have served the prosecution well in traditional crime. However, in economic crime, especially that involving public companies, it is rare for plea bargaining to be used, let alone the granting of immunity. Would this affects confiscation of property?
Cases of forfeiture of contraband money: http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/
Chinese Version
背景
經濟犯罪目前在台灣是一個逐漸攀升的問題。而追討犯罪所得是我們用以降低經濟犯罪動機的主要目標之ㄧ。臺灣相關法律至少提供了兩種執行沒收程序的管道，非司法措施與司法措施等。例如海關可以沒入非法或走私進口的產品，這類情形檢察官就不會參與。另一方面，一旦涉及司法程序，也有刑事與民事措施可以供檢察官利用。
透過刑事訴訟系統進行兇器與毒品等之沒收，在台灣甚為常見。 一旦檢察官可以證明犯罪行為人與財產間之關連性，而被告也被定罪，犯案工具、毒品，甚至交通工具都可以在刑事判決中加以宣告沒收。而刑事執行部門(執行科)就負責來執行這些確定判決。這是傳統處理犯罪所得之作法。然而，這些做法目前已經不足以應付巨變中的全球化財務金融狀況，更遑論必須調查以及沒收被藏放在國境外的犯罪所得財產。因此就不動產而言，甚少見到在刑事判決中被加以沒收者，更少見利用民事途徑來追討此類有關不動產的犯罪所得。 因此，這也就是為何我們迫切想要知道國際間就此問題的實踐方式以及相關執行程序。
在台灣被告的刑事判決除了犯罪行為被起訴外，另外合併請求宣告沒收等，均由檢察官證明無合理可疑。因此就刑事沒收而言，被告必須被起訴。因此基於書面判決，刑事執行部門(執行科)才能進行最終的沒收程序。
在台灣刑事程序中並無所謂的豁免制度，但是在偵查階段，處分、職權處分、緩起訴與認罪協商都可以利用，就傳統犯罪而言這些相關措施已經十分充足。然則，就財產犯罪，尤其是涉及公開發行的上市公司，就甚少行認罪協商的情形，更遑論豁免程序。
澳洲:CONFISCATION OF CRIMINAL ASSETS ACT 2003 Australia
2008.7.11
By Wan-Li Yang
Background
Financial crime is growing problem in Taiwan. To divest such criminals of their ill-gotten gains is one of our main goals and one method of reducing the incentive to carry our these financial crime.
In Taiwan, statutes provide at least two ways, non-judicial and judicial, to implement the forfeiture procedure. For example, customs officers have the authority to forfeit the illegal or smuggled products at the border and prosecutor office won't be involved. On the other hand, once the case involves judicial procedure, either criminal or civil action is available to prosecutors.
It is common for weapon and illegal drugs to be confiscated through criminal procedure. Once the prosecutor can prove a connection between the criminal and property, and once the defendant has been convicted, weapons, illegal drugs and even means of transport are usually forfeited following the written judgment. The law enforcement division of each district prosecutors' office is responsible for enforcing the written judgment. This is the traditional way to deal with property which has been illegally gained or used by the criminals. However, it is insufficient to meet the challenge of changing financial world situation, let alone investigation and confiscated property which had been hidden abroad. For example, in Taiwan little real estate has been forfeited through criminal procedure, and few civil cases has been filed to confiscate the relevant real estate. This is why the authority is eager to see how the procedure works in practice in the foreign stage
In practice, for example, in Taiwan a criminal conviction in which the defendant had been charged and confiscation has been requested requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The criminal confiscation process requires a person must already have been charged with an offence. Upon written conviction, the law enforcement division applies for a permanent confiscation of the property derived from the offence concerned.
In Taiwan, immunity is not allowed in criminal procedure. However, at the pretrial stage dismissal, deferral, plea bargaining and suspended prosecution are all available to the prosecutor. These have served the prosecution well in traditional crime. However, in economic crime, especially that involving public companies, it is rare for plea bargaining to be used, let alone the granting of immunity. Would this affects confiscation of property?
Cases of forfeiture of contraband money: http://jirs.judicial.gov.tw/
Chinese Version
背景
經濟犯罪目前在台灣是一個逐漸攀升的問題。而追討犯罪所得是我們用以降低經濟犯罪動機的主要目標之ㄧ。臺灣相關法律至少提供了兩種執行沒收程序的管道，非司法措施與司法措施等。例如海關可以沒入非法或走私進口的產品，這類情形檢察官就不會參與。另一方面，一旦涉及司法程序，也有刑事與民事措施可以供檢察官利用。
透過刑事訴訟系統進行兇器與毒品等之沒收，在台灣甚為常見。 一旦檢察官可以證明犯罪行為人與財產間之關連性，而被告也被定罪，犯案工具、毒品，甚至交通工具都可以在刑事判決中加以宣告沒收。而刑事執行部門(執行科)就負責來執行這些確定判決。這是傳統處理犯罪所得之作法。然而，這些做法目前已經不足以應付巨變中的全球化財務金融狀況，更遑論必須調查以及沒收被藏放在國境外的犯罪所得財產。因此就不動產而言，甚少見到在刑事判決中被加以沒收者，更少見利用民事途徑來追討此類有關不動產的犯罪所得。 因此，這也就是為何我們迫切想要知道國際間就此問題的實踐方式以及相關執行程序。
在台灣被告的刑事判決除了犯罪行為被起訴外，另外合併請求宣告沒收等，均由檢察官證明無合理可疑。因此就刑事沒收而言，被告必須被起訴。因此基於書面判決，刑事執行部門(執行科)才能進行最終的沒收程序。
在台灣刑事程序中並無所謂的豁免制度，但是在偵查階段，處分、職權處分、緩起訴與認罪協商都可以利用，就傳統犯罪而言這些相關措施已經十分充足。然則，就財產犯罪，尤其是涉及公開發行的上市公司，就甚少行認罪協商的情形，更遑論豁免程序。
澳洲:CONFISCATION OF CRIMINAL ASSETS ACT 2003 Australia
2008.7.11
By Wan-Li Yang
2008年5月10日 星期六
Myanmar News
Taiwanese Religious Leader Went Myanmar
TAIPEI, TAIWAN: A Taiwanese Buddhist leader said Friday (9 May) that Myanmar was promptly dispatching food and medical materials to cyclone survivors even though the reclusive country has been slow to let foreign aid workers in.
Master Hsin Tao made the comments as he returned from a trip to Yangon to assess the destruction from Cyclone Nargis.
He led a team of 10 Taiwanese aid workers to Myanmar this week and dispatched 6 tons of food to cyclone survivors.
Myanmar, also known as Burma, has come in for heavy criticism from the international community for failing to take full advantage of food and other aid it has been offered.
On Friday, spokesman Paul Risley of the World Food Program said "the frustration caused by what appears to be a paperwork delay is unprecedented in modern humanitarian relief efforts."
But Hsin Tao said Myanmar's military rulers have mobilized soldiers and civilians to transport aid materials by ships or helicopters to the cyclone victims spread out along the country's west coast.
Myanmar news from: http://www.mysinchew.com/node/11255?tid=37
Photo released from first apple news:
http://1-apple.com.tw/index.cfm
news:http://1-apple.com.tw/index.cfm?Fuseaction=Article&Sec_ID=3&ShowDate=20080511&IssueID=20080511&art_id=30538685&NewsType=1&SubSec=11
According to the news, Taiwanese Buddhist leaders try to send aid materials by religion tie.
2008年5月7日 星期三
District Prosecutors' Offices in Taiwan
各地方法院檢察署網站 (英文網站佳者*)
Shihlin District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.slc.moj.gov.tw/mp010.html
Location:
http://www.slc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=92261&ctNode=19780&mp=104
Keelung District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.klc.moj.gov.tw/mp026.html
Location:
http://www.klc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=5541&ctNode=11239&mp=120
Miaoli District Prosecutors' Office:
http://www.mlc.moj.gov.tw/mp014.html
Location:
http://www.mlc.moj.gov.tw/mp108.html
Miaoli County (Miaoli Taiwan) is famous for woodcarving and Hakka culture.
Changhua District Prosecutors’ Office
http://www.chc.moj.gov.tw/mp016.html
Location:
http://www.chc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=64058&CtNode=16361&mp=110
Kinmen District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.kmc.moj.gov.tw/mp028.html
Location:
http://www.kmc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=77490&CtNode=18456&mp=122
Kinmen County is famous for it's Kinmen Kaoliang and Kinmen Knife.
Penghu District Prosecutors’ Office
http://www.phc.moj.gov.tw/mp027.html
Location:
http://www.phc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4343&CtNode=10976&mp=121
Yunlin District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.ulc.moj.gov.tw/mp018.html
Location:
http://www.ulc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=65623&CtNode=16655&mp=112
Tainan District Prosecutors' Office (-)
Tainan District Prosecutors' Office
Taichung District Prosecutor's Office (*)
http://www.tcc.moj.gov.tw/mp109.html
Wanli Yang
2009.2.4 rewrited
Shihlin District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.slc.moj.gov.tw/mp010.html
Location:
http://www.slc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=92261&ctNode=19780&mp=104
Keelung District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.klc.moj.gov.tw/mp026.html
Location:
http://www.klc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=5541&ctNode=11239&mp=120
Miaoli District Prosecutors' Office:
http://www.mlc.moj.gov.tw/mp014.html
Location:
http://www.mlc.moj.gov.tw/mp108.html
Miaoli County (Miaoli Taiwan) is famous for woodcarving and Hakka culture.
Changhua District Prosecutors’ Office
http://www.chc.moj.gov.tw/mp016.html
Location:
http://www.chc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=64058&CtNode=16361&mp=110
Kinmen District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.kmc.moj.gov.tw/mp028.html
Location:
http://www.kmc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=77490&CtNode=18456&mp=122
Kinmen County is famous for it's Kinmen Kaoliang and Kinmen Knife.
Penghu District Prosecutors’ Office
http://www.phc.moj.gov.tw/mp027.html
Location:
http://www.phc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=4343&CtNode=10976&mp=121
Yunlin District Prosecutors' Office
http://www.ulc.moj.gov.tw/mp018.html
Location:
http://www.ulc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=65623&CtNode=16655&mp=112
Tainan District Prosecutors' Office (-)
Tainan District Prosecutors' Office
Taichung District Prosecutor's Office (*)
http://www.tcc.moj.gov.tw/mp109.html
Wanli Yang
2009.2.4 rewrited
2008年5月1日 星期四
the Attorney General of ROC (Taiwan)
The Attorney General of ROC( Taiwan)
The Attorney General of ROC is the chief of both the Supreme Court Prosecutors’ office(Attorney General Office) and prosecution system as a whole.
All public prosecutors are under the direction and supervision by the Attorney General.
Qualifications required to be an Attorney General
According to the law, the Attorney General should has at least one of the following qualifications to be nominated as a candidate.
1. has served any periord as
i. Grand Justice
ii. the president of the Supreme Court
iii. the president of the Administration Court
iv. the chairman of Committee on the Discipline of Public Functionaries. (the chairman of Public Ethic Committee )
2. has served for five years as
i. Judge of the Supreme Court
ii. prosecutor of the Supreme Court Prosecutors'office (Attorney General Office)
iii. the President of High Court
iv. the President of High Court Prosecutors’ Office
3. has served for ten years as
i. Judge
ii. Prosecutor
In practice, the Attorney General always nominated from the Supreme Court Prosecutors’ Office.
Appointment and Tenure of Office
According to the law, Attorney General is specially nominated by the President of ROC(Taiwan) and must be approved by the Legislative Yuan. For historical background to prevent the unwanted political-influence, the Legislative Yuan passed the law to create a tenure system for the Attorney General in 2006, The tenure is four years and only one term can be served.
Chen Tsung-ming is the first ever Attorney General(Prosecutor General) of the ROC nominated under this new four years tenure. His counterpart in the US would be the Federal Attorney General. However, unlike in US, the Attorney General is not considerate a classical part of Administration, therefore required great impartiality in order to maintain the independence of the prosecution system demanded by the public, as well as carries with it enormous responsibility.
The Supreme Court Prosecutors' Office:
http://www.tps.moj.gov.tw/mp002.html
No.235, Sec. 1, Guiyang St.（Gueiyang St）, Zhongzheng District, Taipei City 100, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
10048
Tel: +886-2-2316-7000
Business Hours:
8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Directions: (map of Taiwan maps.google.com.tw)
Link:
Wanli Yang 2008/05/01
The Attorney General of ROC is the chief of both the Supreme Court Prosecutors’ office(Attorney General Office) and prosecution system as a whole.
All public prosecutors are under the direction and supervision by the Attorney General.
Qualifications required to be an Attorney General
According to the law, the Attorney General should has at least one of the following qualifications to be nominated as a candidate.
1. has served any periord as
i. Grand Justice
ii. the president of the Supreme Court
iii. the president of the Administration Court
iv. the chairman of Committee on the Discipline of Public Functionaries. (the chairman of Public Ethic Committee )
2. has served for five years as
i. Judge of the Supreme Court
ii. prosecutor of the Supreme Court Prosecutors'office (Attorney General Office)
iii. the President of High Court
iv. the President of High Court Prosecutors’ Office
3. has served for ten years as
i. Judge
ii. Prosecutor
In practice, the Attorney General always nominated from the Supreme Court Prosecutors’ Office.
Appointment and Tenure of Office
According to the law, Attorney General is specially nominated by the President of ROC(Taiwan) and must be approved by the Legislative Yuan. For historical background to prevent the unwanted political-influence, the Legislative Yuan passed the law to create a tenure system for the Attorney General in 2006, The tenure is four years and only one term can be served.
Chen Tsung-ming is the first ever Attorney General(Prosecutor General) of the ROC nominated under this new four years tenure. His counterpart in the US would be the Federal Attorney General. However, unlike in US, the Attorney General is not considerate a classical part of Administration, therefore required great impartiality in order to maintain the independence of the prosecution system demanded by the public, as well as carries with it enormous responsibility.
The Supreme Court Prosecutors' Office:
http://www.tps.moj.gov.tw/mp002.html
No.235, Sec. 1, Guiyang St.（Gueiyang St）, Zhongzheng District, Taipei City 100, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
10048
Tel: +886-2-2316-7000
Business Hours:
8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Directions: (map of Taiwan maps.google.com.tw)
Link:
Wanli Yang 2008/05/01
2008年4月27日 星期日
卡特(Jimmy Carter)出訪哈馬斯(Hamas)組織是否違反羅根法案
卡特(Jimmy Carter)出訪哈馬斯(Hamas)組織是否違反羅根法案
哈馬斯(Hamas)組織基本上被美國布希政府歸類為恐怖組織之ㄧ環，而不予接觸，然而前美國前總統卡特(Jimmy Carter)抱持著較為務實的態度，卡特認為美國、以色列和歐盟將哈馬斯列入“恐怖組織”名單是“沒有用的”，並且於2008年4月間出訪中東，試圖說服哈馬斯(Hamas)組織領導人梅沙爾( Khaled Meshaal )與巴勒斯坦領導人阿巴斯( Mahmoud Abbas )以及以色列進行和平談判，雖然卡特此行沒有獲得太大的進展，然而哈馬斯( Hamas )組織於2008.4.21(周一)已經表示，將接受巴勒斯坦在1967年中東戰爭時被以色列占領的土地上建國，但不準備承認以色列，立場明顯有所軟化。
然而，美國布希政府一直拒絕與哈馬斯接觸（see Bush Administration Foreign Policy），且不支持卡特的行動。於是美國政府針對這件事情首先在2008年4月24日回應稱沒有看到哈馬斯的態度有什麼改變。原本以為美國政府表表態，這件事情也就這樣算了，想不到，同日美國NPR新聞出現一則抬頭為Jimmy Carter Gives Logan Act a Boost這樣的標語，按指卡特有違反羅根法案之嫌。
羅根法案（The Logan Act）
美國在1799年訂定「羅根法案」，禁止任何人在未經政府授權下，以私人身分與外國政府進行任何形式的接觸互動，影響美國與外國政府之間爭議的處理。
羅根（George Logan）是一名醫師，曾任美國賓州州議員，在1798年美法關係緊張之際，以個人身分前往法國巴黎與法國政府進行接觸，提出美、法兩國改善緊繃關係之建議，並採取一些改善兩國關係之措施，例如解除貿易禁運、釋放遭法國船艦俘虜的美國水手等。而當時法國早也想結束與美國的敵對關係，才能專心應付其他歐洲國家。然而，羅根在沒有美國政府授權下，自行與法國商談和解，返國後深受民主共和黨稱許，但卻引發敵對之聯邦黨強烈不滿，因此以聯邦黨為多數的國會遂通過此一「羅根法案」。
「羅根法案」通過至今已二百多年，並未有人遭到判刑或處罰。多半為反對黨引用「羅根法案」來批評對手政黨之用，例如，南西.波洛西(Nancy Pelosi)前往敘利亞(Syria)時，也曾經被布希政府提出質疑，以達到政治效應。
資料來源：
1.路透社大馬士革，2008.4.21記者Khaled Yacoub Oweis, 2008.4.22，翻譯：余樂 發稿：程芳，哈馬斯稱將接受巴勒斯坦建國 仍不承認以色列。
2.高天生，【媒體萬箭穿心】阿扁「草船借箭」 強推國代選舉，新台灣新聞週刊，2005/05/12 第477期。
3.Daniel Schorr, Jimmy Carter Gives Logan Act a Boost, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89922213,2008.4.28viewed.
4.Wikipedia-, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act
Hamas: see Hamas Wikipedia
5.Text of the Logan Act § 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
By Wan-Li Yang 2008.4.28
哈馬斯(Hamas)組織基本上被美國布希政府歸類為恐怖組織之ㄧ環，而不予接觸，然而前美國前總統卡特(Jimmy Carter)抱持著較為務實的態度，卡特認為美國、以色列和歐盟將哈馬斯列入“恐怖組織”名單是“沒有用的”，並且於2008年4月間出訪中東，試圖說服哈馬斯(Hamas)組織領導人梅沙爾( Khaled Meshaal )與巴勒斯坦領導人阿巴斯( Mahmoud Abbas )以及以色列進行和平談判，雖然卡特此行沒有獲得太大的進展，然而哈馬斯( Hamas )組織於2008.4.21(周一)已經表示，將接受巴勒斯坦在1967年中東戰爭時被以色列占領的土地上建國，但不準備承認以色列，立場明顯有所軟化。
然而，美國布希政府一直拒絕與哈馬斯接觸（see Bush Administration Foreign Policy），且不支持卡特的行動。於是美國政府針對這件事情首先在2008年4月24日回應稱沒有看到哈馬斯的態度有什麼改變。原本以為美國政府表表態，這件事情也就這樣算了，想不到，同日美國NPR新聞出現一則抬頭為Jimmy Carter Gives Logan Act a Boost這樣的標語，按指卡特有違反羅根法案之嫌。
羅根法案（The Logan Act）
美國在1799年訂定「羅根法案」，禁止任何人在未經政府授權下，以私人身分與外國政府進行任何形式的接觸互動，影響美國與外國政府之間爭議的處理。
羅根（George Logan）是一名醫師，曾任美國賓州州議員，在1798年美法關係緊張之際，以個人身分前往法國巴黎與法國政府進行接觸，提出美、法兩國改善緊繃關係之建議，並採取一些改善兩國關係之措施，例如解除貿易禁運、釋放遭法國船艦俘虜的美國水手等。而當時法國早也想結束與美國的敵對關係，才能專心應付其他歐洲國家。然而，羅根在沒有美國政府授權下，自行與法國商談和解，返國後深受民主共和黨稱許，但卻引發敵對之聯邦黨強烈不滿，因此以聯邦黨為多數的國會遂通過此一「羅根法案」。
「羅根法案」通過至今已二百多年，並未有人遭到判刑或處罰。多半為反對黨引用「羅根法案」來批評對手政黨之用，例如，南西.波洛西(Nancy Pelosi)前往敘利亞(Syria)時，也曾經被布希政府提出質疑，以達到政治效應。
資料來源：
1.路透社大馬士革，2008.4.21記者Khaled Yacoub Oweis, 2008.4.22，翻譯：余樂 發稿：程芳，哈馬斯稱將接受巴勒斯坦建國 仍不承認以色列。
2.高天生，【媒體萬箭穿心】阿扁「草船借箭」 強推國代選舉，新台灣新聞週刊，2005/05/12 第477期。
3.Daniel Schorr, Jimmy Carter Gives Logan Act a Boost, http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89922213,2008.4.28viewed.
4.Wikipedia-, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logan_Act
Hamas: see Hamas Wikipedia
5.Text of the Logan Act § 953. Private correspondence with foreign governments.
Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
By Wan-Li Yang 2008.4.28
2008年4月16日 星期三
CPS announces the roll out of two key justice initiatives
CPS announces the roll out of two key justice initiatives
英國皇家檢察署於本月一日宣布將全面實施兩項關鍵性措施( CPS announces the roll out of two key justice initiatives)1 April 2008
英國皇家檢察署(CPS)於2008年4月1日正式宣布將在England以及威爾斯( Wales)地區全面實施兩項關鍵性措施,一為偵查中對證人之訊問(Pre-trial Interview),另一為類似附條件式緩起訴處分,簡稱為附條件式處遇( Conditional Cautions). 就偵查中對證人之訊問此一新措施,可使檢察官在案件進入法院之前,得以訊問證人.而在附條件處遇計畫下,較輕微的犯罪可因此免於進入法院(免於起訴)。
附條件式處遇( Conditional Cautions)主要目的在於改善對被害人的補償、降低再犯率，以及避免輕罪案件進入法院。Director of Public Prosecutions Ken Macdonald QC表示，因為附條件式的處遇目標在於針對適合的案件做出便捷且快速的決定，並藉諮詢被害人意見，將被害人的意見納入處遇計畫中而做出一些適合的"條件"，這樣的措施，使得附條件式處遇變得更加有意義。
附條件式處遇(Conditional Cautions)適用於非常廣泛的案件中，包括毀損案件、竊盜案件以及一些常見的傷害案件。大多的案件所附的條件都為要求被告支付被害人一定的賠償金額，另外有些條件還包括向被害人道歉，或者參加一些戒毒措施等。當然，如果被告沒有完成這些條件，就可能會被以原來所犯之罪名起訴。
The use of conditional cautions is aimed at improving victim satisfaction, reducing re-offending and diverting low-level offenders away from the courts.
Director of Public Prosecutions Sir Ken Macdonald QC said: "Conditional cautions make sense. They are intended to be a swift and speedy resolution to appropriate cases, following a consultation with the victim and taking into account their views when considering suitable cautions."
Conditional cautions are used in a wide range of cases, including criminal damage, theft and common assault. Most conditions require the offender to pay compensation. Other conditions have included writing a letter of apology to the victim and taking part in a drug programme. If offenders do not comply with the conditions, they may be prosecuted for the original offence.
編註:英國的此項新措施與台灣的緩起訴(Suspended Prosecution )較為不同的地方是，第一，台灣的緩起訴設定有1至3年的期間。第二，再緩起訴期間再犯罪的話，仍會被撤銷緩起訴，而原犯之罪，以及再犯之罪均會被提起公訴。所以，並非被告一滿足緩起訴條件，就可以立即換得一個不進入法院的效果，而必須等到"觀察期"期滿，沒有再犯情形，才可以最終獲得一個全然的緩起訴結果。
Notes to Editors
Pre-trial witness interviews
1、The initial four pilot areas were Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Cumbria.
2、The evaluation report was published today and is available on our website in the Victims and Witnesses section - view Pre-trial witness interviews - Interviewing prosecution witnesses
Conditional Cautions (data from CPS Management Information Service as at February 2008)
3、The scheme was implemented by joint CPS/ACPO teams at local and national levels.
4、A total of 6,397 conditional cautions have been issued since the scheme began rolling out in April 2006.
5、The majority of conditions, just under 60%, were for compensation to victims. The second most common condition was a letter of apology in 15% of cases followed by participation in a drug intervention programme in just over 10% of cases.
6、Summary criminal or malicious damage offences, where the value of the damage is less than £500, make up the majority of cases where a conditional caution is used (47%) followed by common assault (11.7%) of cases.
7、A conditional caution has the effect of suspending the prosecution whilst the offender complies with appropriate conditions. If they successfully complete the conditions the caution stands and no action is taken over the prosecution, however if they do not comply the original prosecution goes ahead and the caution is of no effect.
8、Conditional cautions may only be used for a limited range of offences as specified by the DPP and only when the offender admits the offence and is willing to comply with certain conditions.
9、The Prosecutor has to be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to charge the offence, that it is in the public interest to proceed by way of a conditional caution and that the case is appropriate for a conditional cautioning.
10、Conditional Cautions can work well alongside community and neighbourhood policing schemes and help to increase community and victim confidence in achieving a just and appropriate outcome quickly. Conditions can be:
Reparative (such as writing a letter of apology, repairing damage, paying compensation or undertaking unpaid work in the community if public or the wider community are the victims, or mediation between the offender and the victim)
Rehabilitative (attendance at drug or alcohol awareness session in an effort to halt the causes of the offending behaviour)
Restrictive (not to approach a particular area or person)
11、The Crown Prosecution Service is the Government Department responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales. It is responsible for:
Advising the police and reviewing the evidence on cases for possible prosecution;
Deciding the charge where the decision is to prosecute;
Preparing cases for court;
Presentation of cases at court;
The CPS consists of 42 Areas in total, each headed by a Chief Crown Prosecutor (CCP). A telephone service, CPS Direct, provides out-of-hours advice and decisions to police officers across England and Wales. The CPS employs around 8,400 people and prosecuted 1,091,250 cases with an overall conviction rate of 83.7% in 2006-2007. Further information can be found on this website.
Media enquiries to CPS Press Office on 020 7796 8127.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/122_08.html last visited 2007.4.12
By Wan-Li Yang 2008.4.17
英國皇家檢察署於本月一日宣布將全面實施兩項關鍵性措施( CPS announces the roll out of two key justice initiatives)1 April 2008
英國皇家檢察署(CPS)於2008年4月1日正式宣布將在England以及威爾斯( Wales)地區全面實施兩項關鍵性措施,一為偵查中對證人之訊問(Pre-trial Interview),另一為類似附條件式緩起訴處分,簡稱為附條件式處遇( Conditional Cautions). 就偵查中對證人之訊問此一新措施,可使檢察官在案件進入法院之前,得以訊問證人.而在附條件處遇計畫下,較輕微的犯罪可因此免於進入法院(免於起訴)。
附條件式處遇( Conditional Cautions)主要目的在於改善對被害人的補償、降低再犯率，以及避免輕罪案件進入法院。Director of Public Prosecutions Ken Macdonald QC表示，因為附條件式的處遇目標在於針對適合的案件做出便捷且快速的決定，並藉諮詢被害人意見，將被害人的意見納入處遇計畫中而做出一些適合的"條件"，這樣的措施，使得附條件式處遇變得更加有意義。
附條件式處遇(Conditional Cautions)適用於非常廣泛的案件中，包括毀損案件、竊盜案件以及一些常見的傷害案件。大多的案件所附的條件都為要求被告支付被害人一定的賠償金額，另外有些條件還包括向被害人道歉，或者參加一些戒毒措施等。當然，如果被告沒有完成這些條件，就可能會被以原來所犯之罪名起訴。
The use of conditional cautions is aimed at improving victim satisfaction, reducing re-offending and diverting low-level offenders away from the courts.
Director of Public Prosecutions Sir Ken Macdonald QC said: "Conditional cautions make sense. They are intended to be a swift and speedy resolution to appropriate cases, following a consultation with the victim and taking into account their views when considering suitable cautions."
Conditional cautions are used in a wide range of cases, including criminal damage, theft and common assault. Most conditions require the offender to pay compensation. Other conditions have included writing a letter of apology to the victim and taking part in a drug programme. If offenders do not comply with the conditions, they may be prosecuted for the original offence.
編註:英國的此項新措施與台灣的緩起訴(Suspended Prosecution )較為不同的地方是，第一，台灣的緩起訴設定有1至3年的期間。第二，再緩起訴期間再犯罪的話，仍會被撤銷緩起訴，而原犯之罪，以及再犯之罪均會被提起公訴。所以，並非被告一滿足緩起訴條件，就可以立即換得一個不進入法院的效果，而必須等到"觀察期"期滿，沒有再犯情形，才可以最終獲得一個全然的緩起訴結果。
Notes to Editors
Pre-trial witness interviews
1、The initial four pilot areas were Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Cumbria.
2、The evaluation report was published today and is available on our website in the Victims and Witnesses section - view Pre-trial witness interviews - Interviewing prosecution witnesses
Conditional Cautions (data from CPS Management Information Service as at February 2008)
3、The scheme was implemented by joint CPS/ACPO teams at local and national levels.
4、A total of 6,397 conditional cautions have been issued since the scheme began rolling out in April 2006.
5、The majority of conditions, just under 60%, were for compensation to victims. The second most common condition was a letter of apology in 15% of cases followed by participation in a drug intervention programme in just over 10% of cases.
6、Summary criminal or malicious damage offences, where the value of the damage is less than £500, make up the majority of cases where a conditional caution is used (47%) followed by common assault (11.7%) of cases.
7、A conditional caution has the effect of suspending the prosecution whilst the offender complies with appropriate conditions. If they successfully complete the conditions the caution stands and no action is taken over the prosecution, however if they do not comply the original prosecution goes ahead and the caution is of no effect.
8、Conditional cautions may only be used for a limited range of offences as specified by the DPP and only when the offender admits the offence and is willing to comply with certain conditions.
9、The Prosecutor has to be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to charge the offence, that it is in the public interest to proceed by way of a conditional caution and that the case is appropriate for a conditional cautioning.
10、Conditional Cautions can work well alongside community and neighbourhood policing schemes and help to increase community and victim confidence in achieving a just and appropriate outcome quickly. Conditions can be:
Reparative (such as writing a letter of apology, repairing damage, paying compensation or undertaking unpaid work in the community if public or the wider community are the victims, or mediation between the offender and the victim)
Rehabilitative (attendance at drug or alcohol awareness session in an effort to halt the causes of the offending behaviour)
Restrictive (not to approach a particular area or person)
11、The Crown Prosecution Service is the Government Department responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales. It is responsible for:
Advising the police and reviewing the evidence on cases for possible prosecution;
Deciding the charge where the decision is to prosecute;
Preparing cases for court;
Presentation of cases at court;
The CPS consists of 42 Areas in total, each headed by a Chief Crown Prosecutor (CCP). A telephone service, CPS Direct, provides out-of-hours advice and decisions to police officers across England and Wales. The CPS employs around 8,400 people and prosecuted 1,091,250 cases with an overall conviction rate of 83.7% in 2006-2007. Further information can be found on this website.
Media enquiries to CPS Press Office on 020 7796 8127.
http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/122_08.html last visited 2007.4.12
By Wan-Li Yang 2008.4.17
2008年4月11日 星期五
CPS announces the roll out of two key justice initiatives
英國皇家檢察署於本月一日宣布將全面實施兩項關鍵性措施( CPS announces the roll out of two key justice initiatives)
1 April 2008
英國皇家檢察署(CPS)於2008年4月1日正式宣布將在England以及威爾斯( Wales)地區全面實施兩項關鍵性措施，一為偵查中對證人之訊問(Pre-trial Interview)，另一為類似附條件式緩起訴處分，簡稱為附條件式處遇( Conditional Caution)，就偵查中對證人之訊問此一新措施，可使檢察官在案件進入法院之前，得以訊問證人。而在附條件處遇計畫下，較輕微的犯罪可因此免於進入法院(免於起訴)。
The national roll-out of two new initiatives - pre-trial interviews with witnesses and conditional cautions - has now been completed across England and Wales. The pre-trial witness initiative enables prosecutors to interview witnesses before a trial begins and under the conditional cautioning scheme, low-level criminal cases can be diverted away from court.
英國皇家檢察署檢察長(The Director of Public Prosecutions) Ken Macdonald QC 表示，根據以往英國司法之制度,無論任何案件，(偵查中)檢察官是無法訊問證人的，是以，這次的偵查中訊問證人此一新的措施，使英國傳統的司法制度做了一些基本上的改變。 因此Ken Macdonald QC表示此項新措施將成為檢察官非常重要的關鍵偵查工具，得使檢察官就手上的刑事案件可以做出更加適切的決定，也因此可以更加確保檢察官起訴的是更加正確的對象以及更加精確的罪名。
The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC said, "Pre-trial witness interviews represent a fundamental change to our legal system as prosecutors were not allowed to interview witnesses in any cases in England and Wales before these CPS pilots began. I consider witness interviews to be an essential tool to help prosecutors to make better informed decisions about criminal cases so that the right person is brought before the right court for the right offence."
偵查中訊問證人此一偵查技巧主要可以用以評價證人證詞之可信性，並幫助檢察官釐整複雜之證據，此外檢察官也可以藉此機會向證人解釋案件進入法院後的司法程序。偵查中詢問證人此一措施一開始是在2006年1月起先在四個CPS轄區中( Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Cumbria. )試行，而今年(2008)CPS已經決定將此一措施施行於全England 以及 Wales地區。
英國皇家檢察署乃是直到20世紀的80年代才成立，在此之前，英國均由警察在進行偵查以及決定是否將案件送入審判系統，是以，英國皇家檢察署成立後，雖然將一些重要案件攬在皇家檢察署，並由皇家檢察官決定是否起訴，然則，一如美國康州州檢察官制度，檢察官並沒有所謂正式的在偵查中訊問證人這樣的形式存在。在康州，檢察官在起訴案件前後當然可以訪談，但是與台灣非常不同的是，這樣的訪談非常簡單，無筆錄、錄音形式，更無地點的限制，所以在康州的New Haven州檢察官辦公室中，雖然有10餘位助理檢察官，但是整個辦公室僅有一位正式的Clerk，並無類似台灣的書記官，也就是每一位助理檢察官並沒有配置書記官的狀況。
而我國的檢察官，因為有起訴、不起訴、職權處分以及緩起訴等決定權，是以，他兼具了康州助理檢察官以及預審法官(Pretrial Judge)的特性，必須開庭，行一定形式的訊問，作證正式筆錄，來決定案件是否適宜為緩起訴等。因此，就英國皇家檢察署而言，偵查中訊問證人的這項措施，確實是大大的融合了英美檢察制度以及歐洲大陸法檢察制度的重要一步。
The evaluation report was published today and is available on our website in the Victims and Witnesses section - view Pre-trial witness interviews - Interviewing prosecution witnesses
The Crown Prosecution Service is the Government Department responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales. It is responsible for:
Advising the police and reviewing the evidence on cases for possible prosecution;
Deciding the charge where the decision is to prosecute;
Preparing cases for court;
Presentation of cases at court;
The CPS consists of 42 Areas in total, each headed by a Chief Crown Prosecutor (CCP). A telephone service, CPS Direct, provides out-of-hours advice and decisions to police officers across England and Wales. The CPS employs around 8,400 people and prosecuted 1,091,250 cases with an overall conviction rate of 83.7% in 2006-2007. Further information can be found on this website.
Media enquiries to CPS Press Office on 020 7796 8127.
資料來源:http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/122_08.html last visited 2007.4.12
BY WAN-LI YANG 2007.4.12
1 April 2008
英國皇家檢察署(CPS)於2008年4月1日正式宣布將在England以及威爾斯( Wales)地區全面實施兩項關鍵性措施，一為偵查中對證人之訊問(Pre-trial Interview)，另一為類似附條件式緩起訴處分，簡稱為附條件式處遇( Conditional Caution)，就偵查中對證人之訊問此一新措施，可使檢察官在案件進入法院之前，得以訊問證人。而在附條件處遇計畫下，較輕微的犯罪可因此免於進入法院(免於起訴)。
The national roll-out of two new initiatives - pre-trial interviews with witnesses and conditional cautions - has now been completed across England and Wales. The pre-trial witness initiative enables prosecutors to interview witnesses before a trial begins and under the conditional cautioning scheme, low-level criminal cases can be diverted away from court.
英國皇家檢察署檢察長(The Director of Public Prosecutions) Ken Macdonald QC 表示，根據以往英國司法之制度,無論任何案件，(偵查中)檢察官是無法訊問證人的，是以，這次的偵查中訊問證人此一新的措施，使英國傳統的司法制度做了一些基本上的改變。 因此Ken Macdonald QC表示此項新措施將成為檢察官非常重要的關鍵偵查工具，得使檢察官就手上的刑事案件可以做出更加適切的決定，也因此可以更加確保檢察官起訴的是更加正確的對象以及更加精確的罪名。
The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC said, "Pre-trial witness interviews represent a fundamental change to our legal system as prosecutors were not allowed to interview witnesses in any cases in England and Wales before these CPS pilots began. I consider witness interviews to be an essential tool to help prosecutors to make better informed decisions about criminal cases so that the right person is brought before the right court for the right offence."
偵查中訊問證人此一偵查技巧主要可以用以評價證人證詞之可信性，並幫助檢察官釐整複雜之證據，此外檢察官也可以藉此機會向證人解釋案件進入法院後的司法程序。偵查中詢問證人此一措施一開始是在2006年1月起先在四個CPS轄區中( Merseyside, Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Cumbria. )試行，而今年(2008)CPS已經決定將此一措施施行於全England 以及 Wales地區。
英國皇家檢察署乃是直到20世紀的80年代才成立，在此之前，英國均由警察在進行偵查以及決定是否將案件送入審判系統，是以，英國皇家檢察署成立後，雖然將一些重要案件攬在皇家檢察署，並由皇家檢察官決定是否起訴，然則，一如美國康州州檢察官制度，檢察官並沒有所謂正式的在偵查中訊問證人這樣的形式存在。在康州，檢察官在起訴案件前後當然可以訪談，但是與台灣非常不同的是，這樣的訪談非常簡單，無筆錄、錄音形式，更無地點的限制，所以在康州的New Haven州檢察官辦公室中，雖然有10餘位助理檢察官，但是整個辦公室僅有一位正式的Clerk，並無類似台灣的書記官，也就是每一位助理檢察官並沒有配置書記官的狀況。
而我國的檢察官，因為有起訴、不起訴、職權處分以及緩起訴等決定權，是以，他兼具了康州助理檢察官以及預審法官(Pretrial Judge)的特性，必須開庭，行一定形式的訊問，作證正式筆錄，來決定案件是否適宜為緩起訴等。因此，就英國皇家檢察署而言，偵查中訊問證人的這項措施，確實是大大的融合了英美檢察制度以及歐洲大陸法檢察制度的重要一步。
The evaluation report was published today and is available on our website in the Victims and Witnesses section - view Pre-trial witness interviews - Interviewing prosecution witnesses
The Crown Prosecution Service is the Government Department responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales. It is responsible for:
Advising the police and reviewing the evidence on cases for possible prosecution;
Deciding the charge where the decision is to prosecute;
Preparing cases for court;
Presentation of cases at court;
The CPS consists of 42 Areas in total, each headed by a Chief Crown Prosecutor (CCP). A telephone service, CPS Direct, provides out-of-hours advice and decisions to police officers across England and Wales. The CPS employs around 8,400 people and prosecuted 1,091,250 cases with an overall conviction rate of 83.7% in 2006-2007. Further information can be found on this website.
Media enquiries to CPS Press Office on 020 7796 8127.
資料來源:http://www.cps.gov.uk/news/pressreleases/122_08.html last visited 2007.4.12
BY WAN-LI YANG 2007.4.12
2008年3月21日 星期五
Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office
Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office Profile/ Kaohsiung District Attorney Office
(Photo:http://www.ksc.moj.gov.tw/mp115.html The original building housing the Kaohsiung District Court and Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office was demolished in 1986)
(Photo:http://www.ksc.moj.gov.tw/mp115.html The original building housing the Kaohsiung District Court and Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office was demolished in 1986)
Structure
As with a number of State Attorneys' Offices in the US, the District Court and the District Prosecutors' Office share the same building. However, due to the historical influence of the Japanese-German justice model in Taiwan, the District Court and the District Prosecutors' Office share an almost equal space within one building. That is to say, the Prosecutors' office not occupy simply a small part of the building but almost half of it.
Workload / Caseload
In general, once a criminal activity has been reported by the agent or a complaint has been made by the individual, prosecutors have no leeway to decide whether or not to take the case. No discretion is allowed in the selection of case. What is the effect of this? In 2004, the population of Kaohsiung City was 1,512,677, while a further1,238,925 people lived in Kaohsiung County. In the same year in Kaohsiung Prosecutor's Office( Kaohsiung District Attorney Office) there were 47,924 criminal cases, 27,907 enforcement cases and 126,654 other cases, including civil complaints or criminal cases which hadn't been proved or for evidence hadn't been found. The number of prosecutors working in the Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office((the Kaohsiung Distirct Attorney Office) was between eighty and ninety in 2004. The inevitable result is a very heavy workload.
As with a number of State Attorneys' Offices in the US, the District Court and the District Prosecutors' Office share the same building. However, due to the historical influence of the Japanese-German justice model in Taiwan, the District Court and the District Prosecutors' Office share an almost equal space within one building. That is to say, the Prosecutors' office not occupy simply a small part of the building but almost half of it.
Workload / Caseload
In general, once a criminal activity has been reported by the agent or a complaint has been made by the individual, prosecutors have no leeway to decide whether or not to take the case. No discretion is allowed in the selection of case. What is the effect of this? In 2004, the population of Kaohsiung City was 1,512,677, while a further1,238,925 people lived in Kaohsiung County. In the same year in Kaohsiung Prosecutor's Office( Kaohsiung District Attorney Office) there were 47,924 criminal cases, 27,907 enforcement cases and 126,654 other cases, including civil complaints or criminal cases which hadn't been proved or for evidence hadn't been found. The number of prosecutors working in the Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office((the Kaohsiung Distirct Attorney Office) was between eighty and ninety in 2004. The inevitable result is a very heavy workload.
(see http://www.ksc.moj.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=32480&ctNode=13353&mp=021, 2008/3/21 reviewed.)
Division of Duties
Since 2003, the Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office (the Kaohsiung District Attorney Office) has embrassed the cross examination process. This indicates that Taiwanese Criminal Procedure is moving away from the Japanese-German justice model and closer to the American Criminal Justice system. How can an old continental legal system restruture itself to accommodate a brand new American-Hollywood-style cross examination? Well, a lot of different things have happened, but I prefer to leave this to the reader's imagination. Returning to the subject of workload, once the Judicial Yuan had decided to install this new system, the most crucial aspect for Prosecution System was manpower. Unles the Prosecutors' office( District Attorney Office) doubled its manpower the whole criminal justice system might collapse.
As a result, each local Prosecutors' office now has two main sessions. One, the so called 'cross examination' session represents the public's interest in court of justice. The other, the so called 'investigation session' carries out the traditional duty of intensive investigation, to prove that an individual or company has committed a crime. To do this successfully, a lot of tasks are required - pre-interviewing witness, interrogating defedants, checking evidence. Furthermore, the investigation session is itself divided into 10 unions, for example the IP Crime Unit, the Drug related Unit and the Anti-corruption Unit. The investigation session conducts its investigation and oversees cases reported by the police, and once the investigation-prosecutor has decided that a case is ready for court, he or she will file information and all evidence, then the 'cross examination' session will assign a prosecutor to present the facts to between one and three judges in a court of law.
Division of Duties
Since 2003, the Kaohsiung Prosecutors' Office (the Kaohsiung District Attorney Office) has embrassed the cross examination process. This indicates that Taiwanese Criminal Procedure is moving away from the Japanese-German justice model and closer to the American Criminal Justice system. How can an old continental legal system restruture itself to accommodate a brand new American-Hollywood-style cross examination? Well, a lot of different things have happened, but I prefer to leave this to the reader's imagination. Returning to the subject of workload, once the Judicial Yuan had decided to install this new system, the most crucial aspect for Prosecution System was manpower. Unles the Prosecutors' office( District Attorney Office) doubled its manpower the whole criminal justice system might collapse.
As a result, each local Prosecutors' office now has two main sessions. One, the so called 'cross examination' session represents the public's interest in court of justice. The other, the so called 'investigation session' carries out the traditional duty of intensive investigation, to prove that an individual or company has committed a crime. To do this successfully, a lot of tasks are required - pre-interviewing witness, interrogating defedants, checking evidence. Furthermore, the investigation session is itself divided into 10 unions, for example the IP Crime Unit, the Drug related Unit and the Anti-corruption Unit. The investigation session conducts its investigation and oversees cases reported by the police, and once the investigation-prosecutor has decided that a case is ready for court, he or she will file information and all evidence, then the 'cross examination' session will assign a prosecutor to present the facts to between one and three judges in a court of law.
The Kaohsiung District Attorneys' Office/ The Taiwan Kaohsiung District Court
No.188, Hedong Rd., Cianjin District, Kaohsiung City 801, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
80122
Tel: +886-7-2161468Ext.3310 / 886-7-2161418
No.188, Hedong Rd., Cianjin District, Kaohsiung City 801, Taiwan (R.O.C.)
80122
Tel: +886-7-2161468Ext.3310 / 886-7-2161418
Business Hours:
8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
Directions: (map of Taiwan maps.google.com.tw)
<http://maps.google.com.tw/maps/mm?f=q&q=&ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=22.626053,120.289395&spn=0.005734,0.00942&z=17>
<http://maps.google.com.tw/maps/mm?f=q&q=&ie=UTF8&hl=en&ll=22.626053,120.289395&spn=0.005734,0.00942&z=17>
2008.3.21 By Wan-Li Yang
2007年10月18日 星期四
DUI Lawyers
Despite the uncertainty above(What Happens in DUI Trial), even though the consequences of DUI cases might be severe. Taiwanese defendants accused of drunk driving rarely hire DUI lawyers to represent them in pretrial or trial procedures, and DUI lawyers are not as common as their American counterparts. However, it is wise to consult a local lawyer who knows the courts, the laws and your rights. If you think you may need assistance in your drunk driving case, contact an attorney for help. Alternatively, call the local DMV office or porsecutors office for help.
DMV office:
Kaohsiung Office of Motor Vehicles
Taipei DMV office
DMV record：
https://www.mvdis.gov.tw/wps/portal( in Chinese version)
DMV practice test:
http://www.thb.gov.tw/cai/default.htm( in Chinese version)
Wan-Li Yang 2007/10/19 Taiwan/ Kaohsiung
DMV office:
Kaohsiung Office of Motor Vehicles
Taipei DMV office
DMV record：
https://www.mvdis.gov.tw/wps/portal( in Chinese version)
DMV practice test:
http://www.thb.gov.tw/cai/default.htm( in Chinese version)
Wan-Li Yang 2007/10/19 Taiwan/ Kaohsiung
2007年10月10日 星期三
What Happens in a drink driving case in Taiwan?( DUI Laws)
Taiwan Traffic regulations ( DUI Laws) state that drivers must not drive when their breath alcohol level exceeds 0.25 mg/l. A driver who violates this regulation will receive a fine from the DMV of between NT$15000-60000, and will have his/her license suspended for one year. The driving ban takes immediate effect. Further, if the driver's alcohol level exceeds 0.55 mg/l, in addition to the find and driving ban, he/she will also be charged by the local prosecutor's office with violating public order, a charge which could lead to a jail stentence. Such cases will be dealt with in one of the following ways:
1. where appropriate, the prosecutor may decide to dismiss the public violation charge. This is very rare and at the discretion of the prosecutor, but may happen in the following circumstances:
(1) the driver did not injure anoter party and can prove that his/her contribution to society, for example, he/she is charity worker and has no criminal record; 'balances' the negative behavior.
(2) the driver did not injure another party, but was himself/herself seriously injured.
It should be stressed again that dismissal is extremely rare.
2. the prosecutor may decide to defer the case for one to three years, if the driver offers to make a donation to an NGO, carries out 40 to 250 hours of social work, or a third party has been injured but the compensation deal has already be settled. However, the following points should be noted:
(1) the donation is made to an NGO and cannot be deducted from the DMV fine.
(2) a deferral amounts to pretrial probation. If the driver commits any further crime during the probation period, the deferral order may be revoked and the case charged as normal.
3. the prosecutor may decide to prosecte the case. This could be for the following reasons:
(1) the driver fails to appear for interview (pretrial hearing) without reasonable explanation.
(2) the alcohol level is too high for the charge to be dropped (nolle ) or deferred.
(3) a third party has been injured, and no compensation deal has been settled.
----------
If a DUI case is prosecuted, the following outcomes are possible:
1. a verdict of not guilty-extremely rare.
2. a verdict of guilty with a sentence as follows:
(1) a fine.
(2) detention of 1 to 59 days-- the imprisonment might be converted into a fine.
(3) penal servitude of 2 to 12 months--the imprisonment might be converted into a fine, only if he/she get a under 6 months jail period.
Naturally, the disadvantage of being sentenced is that the defendant not only has a criminal record, but also takes the risk of being sent to jail. Therefore, dirvers are strongly urged to show up for their interview or pretrial hearing. See 3.(1) above.
(next:DUI Lawyer:http://wanliyang.blogspot.com/2007/10/dui-lawyers.html)
WanLi Yang 2007/10/11 Taiwan
1. where appropriate, the prosecutor may decide to dismiss the public violation charge. This is very rare and at the discretion of the prosecutor, but may happen in the following circumstances:
(1) the driver did not injure anoter party and can prove that his/her contribution to society, for example, he/she is charity worker and has no criminal record; 'balances' the negative behavior.
(2) the driver did not injure another party, but was himself/herself seriously injured.
It should be stressed again that dismissal is extremely rare.
2. the prosecutor may decide to defer the case for one to three years, if the driver offers to make a donation to an NGO, carries out 40 to 250 hours of social work, or a third party has been injured but the compensation deal has already be settled. However, the following points should be noted:
(1) the donation is made to an NGO and cannot be deducted from the DMV fine.
(2) a deferral amounts to pretrial probation. If the driver commits any further crime during the probation period, the deferral order may be revoked and the case charged as normal.
3. the prosecutor may decide to prosecte the case. This could be for the following reasons:
(1) the driver fails to appear for interview (pretrial hearing) without reasonable explanation.
(2) the alcohol level is too high for the charge to be dropped (nolle ) or deferred.
(3) a third party has been injured, and no compensation deal has been settled.
----------
If a DUI case is prosecuted, the following outcomes are possible:
1. a verdict of not guilty-extremely rare.
2. a verdict of guilty with a sentence as follows:
(1) a fine.
(2) detention of 1 to 59 days-- the imprisonment might be converted into a fine.
(3) penal servitude of 2 to 12 months--the imprisonment might be converted into a fine, only if he/she get a under 6 months jail period.
Naturally, the disadvantage of being sentenced is that the defendant not only has a criminal record, but also takes the risk of being sent to jail. Therefore, dirvers are strongly urged to show up for their interview or pretrial hearing. See 3.(1) above.
(next:DUI Lawyer:http://wanliyang.blogspot.com/2007/10/dui-lawyers.html)
WanLi Yang 2007/10/11 Taiwan
2007年6月7日 星期四
CIA, Italian Intelligence Kidnapping Trial
CIA, Italian Intel Kidnapping Trial to Start in Italy
"The trial of several CIA and Italian intelligence officers is set to begin Friday in Italy. Prosecutors say the officers kidnapped an Islamic cleric in Milan and transported him to Egypt, where he said he was tortured. This is the first trial associated with the CIA's policy of "extraordinary rendition." All 26 American defendants will be tried in absentia." (NPR 2007.6.7)
美國CIA幹員據悉依據所謂的"extraordinary rendition"政策與義大利情治人員在2003義大利米蘭境內，沒有持任何拘票即在一位幕斯林被害人家中將人抓走，而且逕行將人送出國境，關入位於埃及的美軍涉於埃及的秘密監獄長達十四個月之久。
義大利檢察官針對本案的調查，同時也在義大利境內引發"行政權"與"司法權 "衝突之爭。
本案義大利檢察官在一連串長期而且所費不貲的循線調查(飯店、機票與電話號碼等)而得以確定嫌疑人後，已經就本案針對CIA以綁架罪名( Kidnaping)起訴且經法官簽發起訴書，法官表示沒有經過法定程序拘捕並將人關於秘密監獄的行為就是綁架，而且根本無法改善或報障國家安全，明天法院就會依據"缺席審判"程序開始審判。
本件被害人表示被關的十四個月期間還被CIA刑求。相對於檢察官對美國傷害民主法治、義大利境內的弱勢團體的指摘，義大利政府目前就相對保守了，政府表示對美國CIA在其境內活動一事均不知情。當然美國就此案仍然保持高調，表示本案審判顯然會傷害美國的國家秘密。不過，Human Right Watch的NGOs也有插一腳，出面譴責美國的秘密活動嚴重傷害人權。
歐盟已經據新聞預測，預料應在明天( 2007.6.8)公開美國在歐盟境內抓人的相關報告了。
註:義大利司法官有三種，Prosecutors, preliminary investigaiton judges, and trial judges. 所以上開簽發起訴書的應該是preliminary investigation judges. see Elisabetta Grande, Italian Criminal Justice: Borrowing and Resistance, 48 Am. J. Comp. L. 227.
台灣的司法體制，只要將人犯通緝就可以在行政程序上加以結案，這種通緝當然是必須基於刑事訴訟法的法定程序，但是，通緝後能否繼續審判? 法律似乎也沒有明確明文禁止? 僅有一些行政程序"簡便"讓司法人員得以"結案"。其實，如果案件一概都能未經通緝即起訴或判決，當然與追求真實與正義的目標不符; 相反的，如果案件被告都已經開過庭，只是因為調查、審判時間拉長、司法官輪調換人等因素使被告被逸脫，能否再以通緝結案? 這可能要多加考慮，否則，一些經濟要犯，逸出國境後，不適度尋求國際協助，就一概以通緝結案，長久下來，實會導致有司法公信力下沉，沒能力逃逸的被關，有能力的繼續在外國消遙的怪現象。
Wan-Li Yang
2007.6.7
"The trial of several CIA and Italian intelligence officers is set to begin Friday in Italy. Prosecutors say the officers kidnapped an Islamic cleric in Milan and transported him to Egypt, where he said he was tortured. This is the first trial associated with the CIA's policy of "extraordinary rendition." All 26 American defendants will be tried in absentia." (NPR 2007.6.7)
美國CIA幹員據悉依據所謂的"extraordinary rendition"政策與義大利情治人員在2003義大利米蘭境內，沒有持任何拘票即在一位幕斯林被害人家中將人抓走，而且逕行將人送出國境，關入位於埃及的美軍涉於埃及的秘密監獄長達十四個月之久。
義大利檢察官針對本案的調查，同時也在義大利境內引發"行政權"與"司法權 "衝突之爭。
本案義大利檢察官在一連串長期而且所費不貲的循線調查(飯店、機票與電話號碼等)而得以確定嫌疑人後，已經就本案針對CIA以綁架罪名( Kidnaping)起訴且經法官簽發起訴書，法官表示沒有經過法定程序拘捕並將人關於秘密監獄的行為就是綁架，而且根本無法改善或報障國家安全，明天法院就會依據"缺席審判"程序開始審判。
本件被害人表示被關的十四個月期間還被CIA刑求。相對於檢察官對美國傷害民主法治、義大利境內的弱勢團體的指摘，義大利政府目前就相對保守了，政府表示對美國CIA在其境內活動一事均不知情。當然美國就此案仍然保持高調，表示本案審判顯然會傷害美國的國家秘密。不過，Human Right Watch的NGOs也有插一腳，出面譴責美國的秘密活動嚴重傷害人權。
歐盟已經據新聞預測，預料應在明天( 2007.6.8)公開美國在歐盟境內抓人的相關報告了。
註:義大利司法官有三種，Prosecutors, preliminary investigaiton judges, and trial judges. 所以上開簽發起訴書的應該是preliminary investigation judges. see Elisabetta Grande, Italian Criminal Justice: Borrowing and Resistance, 48 Am. J. Comp. L. 227.
台灣的司法體制，只要將人犯通緝就可以在行政程序上加以結案，這種通緝當然是必須基於刑事訴訟法的法定程序，但是，通緝後能否繼續審判? 法律似乎也沒有明確明文禁止? 僅有一些行政程序"簡便"讓司法人員得以"結案"。其實，如果案件一概都能未經通緝即起訴或判決，當然與追求真實與正義的目標不符; 相反的，如果案件被告都已經開過庭，只是因為調查、審判時間拉長、司法官輪調換人等因素使被告被逸脫，能否再以通緝結案? 這可能要多加考慮，否則，一些經濟要犯，逸出國境後，不適度尋求國際協助，就一概以通緝結案，長久下來，實會導致有司法公信力下沉，沒能力逃逸的被關，有能力的繼續在外國消遙的怪現象。
Wan-Li Yang
2007.6.7
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)