Comments of the Right of Accessing to the Case Files in Detention Procedure in Investigation

偵查中羈押審查程序閱卷權之運作評析

鄭文正(Wen-Cheng Cheng)

Non-Disclosure of Investigations ； the right of accessing to the case files in detention procedure ； attorney ethics ； the Crime of Confidential Information Leakages ； Action right ； 偵查不公開 ； 審查程序閱卷權 ； 律師倫理 ； 洩密罪 ； 訴訟權

修平學報

43期（2022 / 03 / 01）

57 - 70

英文

When the state authorities are investigating a crime, in response to criminal behaviors are usually secretive. Therefore, there are certain restrictions on the principle of secret investigation. Due process of law under Article 8 of the Constitution and right of instituting legal proceedings under Article 16 of the Constitution demand that our country should protect people's right and fulfill the principle of the constitutional state. In the J. Y. Interpretation No. 762, the grand justice of the Judicial Yuan confirms the defendant in the detention hearing of an investigation has the right of accessing case files. And Article 31-1 of the Criminal Procedure Code stipulates during the detention hearing of an investigation, basically the defender has the right of accessing the case file as same as in the trial procedure. For an accused without representation of an attorney during the detention hearing proceedings of an investigation, the court shall present the accused with the contents of the case file and evidence by using appropriate methods. However, there are doubts about how the system works in practice. And after the defender reads the file, some of them are suspected of leaking confidential information. This report is intended to explore the current situation about the right of accessing case files during the detention hearing of an investigation, and the responsibility of the defender violates the principle of secret investigation.

國家機關偵查犯罪，因應犯罪行為通常具有隱密性，因此對偵查秘密進行有一定需求，但憲法第8條正當法律程序及憲法第16條訴訟權保障，要求國家應該保障人民權利，落實法治國原則，因此司法院大法官在釋字第737號肯認被告偵查中羈押制度得行使閱卷權利之見解後，並於刑事訴訟法增訂第33條之1，明定偵查中之羈押審查程序，辯護人原則上享有與審判中相同之完整閱卷權；無辯護人之被告則享有適當之資訊獲知權，然而實務上衍生如何運作該制度之疑義，且發生辯護人閱卷後疑似洩漏偵查中應保密事項之情形，本文即欲探討偵查中之羈押審查程序閱卷權之行使現況，以及辯護人假若違反偵查不公開之相關責任等議題。

1. Su, Pei-Yu(2019).The Judgement of Investigation Agents' Leaking Secrets Except Defense： Analysis on the Investigation Secrecy Laws and Practices of the ROC and the USA Federal Legal System.National Taiwan University Law Journal,48(2),590.
   連結：
2. [107SJJ] No. 977 Criminal Judgment of Taoyuan District Court.
3. [108SSJ] No. 3710 Criminal Judgment of Taiwan High Court District Court.
4. [107SIJ] No. 1186 Criminal Judgment of New Taipei District Court.
5. Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.737.
6. (2018).Judiciary and Legal Affairs Committee of the 4th Session of the 9th Legislative Yuan ,How to Implement Fairness.Justice and Human Rights Protection in Criminal Proceedings Information on the public hearing
7. Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.512.
8. [108TFJ] No. 11 Disciplinary Resolution of Attorney Ethics and Disciplinary Review Committee.
9. [109CJJ] No. 576 Criminal Judgment of Taichung District Court.
10. [106SJJ] No. 338 Criminal Judgment of New Taipei District Court.
11. [108LCJ] No. 37 Disciplinary Resolution of Attorney Ethics and Disciplinary Committee.
12. Judicial Yuan Interpretation No.591.
13. Chen, Wen-gui(2017).New system of accessing to the case files in detention procedure for defendants and attorney to be informed of evidence.Judicial Weekly,5.19,6.
14. Fu, Mei-hui(2006).Investigating injustice and presumption of innocence.Criminal Law Journal,50(2),70-71.
15. Ke, Yao-cheng.The investigation of the right of accessing to the case files in detention procedure problem commentary-Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 737.Yuedan court case time,57,65.
16. Li, Rong-Geng(2017).Comments of the Judicial Yuan Interpretation No. 737 and The Newly Amended Criminal Procedure Act of 2017.Yuedan court case time,65,22.
17. Yang, Yun-Hua(2005).The Breakthrough of the Right to accessing to the case files in detention procedure of the European Court of Human Rights in Recent Years.Taiwan Law Journal,70,130.
18. Zhu, Zhi-ping(2019).Supervision and Relief of Basic Rights Intervention in Criminal Investigation Procedures-For example, the establishment of a special court and the system of reading files in the investigation of custody examination procedures.Central Police University Law Review,36,270-271.