警察追車正當性界限之探討

Boundaries of Legitimacy of Police pursuit

方文宗(Wen-Tsung Fang)

追車 ； 追蹤稽查 ； 比例原則 ； 依法令之行為 ； 正當事由 ； pursuit ； tracing and inspection ； principle of proportionality ； conduct performed in accordance with law or order ； reasonable cause

高大法學論叢

15卷2期（2020 / 03 / 01）

135 - 139+141-175+177-178

繁體中文

警察在執行臨檢或交通稽查勤務，發現犯罪嫌疑重大而逃逸，基於維護治安，發動追車緝捕犯罪嫌疑人，為警察法定職責。但對於瞬間決定是否追車，實務未有一個明確判斷標準，以致爭議不斷。然人權保障與治安維護皆相當重要，警察追車除須符合法令規定或授權外，亦須符合比例原則。警察發現交通違規不服稽查逃逸者，法令僅賦予警察保持適當距離，得知車藉資料或身分，即應停止執行，並無授權警察得任意追車；執行路檢或臨檢勤務，客觀合理發現危害交通工具、合理懷疑有犯罪嫌疑或犯罪之虞者，闖越管制站或攔檢點等，法令僅能以追蹤稽查方式，並通報車輛逃逸方向，伺機攔停，客觀情勢判斷無法或不宜攔停車輛時，即應終止執行；發現現行犯、通緝犯、脫逃人犯等，必須發動追車，仍須考量現場人車、路段及交通狀況，客觀情勢判斷若無法或不宜繼續追車，應改以事後循線查緝方式為之，並遵守比例原則，以保障民眾權益。因此，警察可否追車，建議採下列情形判斷：（一）追車行為完全正當：發現犯罪當然可以追車，但須符合比例原則。（二）追車行為顯有過當：未有法律規定與授權可以追車，當然不能追車。（三）追車行為的正當性有所疑慮：發現犯罪嫌疑重大，有具體事實，經盤查逃逸，應可以追車。

Based on maintaining law and order, and social security, the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator is the legal responsibility of the police while they are conducting stop-and-check or routine traffic inspections on the road. In practice, no standards are explicitly set for the police to make an instant decision on pursuit, which leads to lots of controversies. However, maintaining the public's safety is as important as protecting human rights. In addition to meeting the requirements and rules prescribed and authorized by laws and orders, police pursuit should also be in line with the principle of proportionality. Upon discovering traffic violations, law enforcement officers are authorized to keep an appropriate distance while chasing those who refuse to inspect and attempt to escape. The police should immediately terminate a chase as long as they obtained sufficient information for issuing a citation. The police are not unconditionally authorized for vehicle pursuits. During the implementation of traffic stops, the police objectively and reasonably discover a suspicious car proceeding past a stop and check point, the law imposes a duty on law enforcement officers can only track and inform the way of the vehicle's escape direction, and wait for the opportunity to pull it over. The police objectively use their discretion in deciding when and how to terminate the pursuit. However, the police must use intensive measures to stop red-handed, wanted, or escaped criminals. For example, police high speed pursuits. Further law enforcement officers should still consider factors such as road conditions, population density, crime severity and necessity. Similarly, if the circumstances a pursuit should be discontinued, the police should terminate the chase and then conduct a follow-up investigation. Therefore, the following guidelines are suggested to police officers for making a decision on whether they should initiate vehicle pursuits or not. First, completely legitimate vehicle pursuits: pursuits are legally accepted upon discovering criminals but the principle of proportionality shall be applied. Second, excessive vehicle pursuits: pursuits are not accepted where no regulations or authorization can be referred to. Third, the questions about the legality of the police pursuit: the vehicle can be pursued if the police find hard evidence against the suspect and who flees after being examined and questioned.

1. 方文宗(2019)。警械使用正當性之刑法界限。東海大學法學研究，57，51-85。
   連結：
2. Alpert, Geoffrey P.(1997).Police Pursuit: Policies and Training.National Institute Of Justice,1-8.
3. Alpert, Geoffrey P.,Kenney, Dennis.,Dunharn, Roger,Smith, William,Cosgrove, Michael(1996).,National Institute of Justice.
4. Becknell, Conan,Larry, Mays G.,Giever, Dennis M.(1999).Policy restrictiveness and police pursuits.Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management,22(1),93-110.
5. Buchwalter, Benjamin(2014).Return to "Reasonable" in Section 1983 Police Pursuit Excessive Force Litigation.The Hastings Law Journal,65(6),1665-1690.
6. Bull, Bonnie E.(2013).In Pursuit of a Remedy: A Need for Reform of Police Officer Liability.S. C. L. Rev.,64,1015-1036.
7. Hoffmann, Gabi,Mazerolle, Paul(2005).Police pursuit in Queensland: research, review and reform.Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management,28(3),30-542.
8. Lum, Cynthia,Fachner, George(2008).Police Pursuits in an age of innovation and reform: The IACP police pursuit database.National Institute of Justice,1-102.
9. Wade, Lee M.(2015).Highrisk pursuit classification: categorical analysis of variables from georgia police pursuits.Crim. Just. Policy Rev.,26(3),278-292.
10. 方文宗(2004)。警察機關取締飆車範圍與限制。律師雜誌，292，78-89。
11. 李震山(2002).警察法論─警察任務編.台北:正典.
12. 李震山(2019).行政法導論.台北:三民.
13. 林山田(2001).刑事程序法.台北:五南.
14. 林山田(2008).刑法通論（上）.台北:作者自版.
15. 林東茂(2002).危險犯與經濟刑法.台北:五南.
16. 柯耀程(2017).刑法概論.台北:一品.
17. 柯耀程(2014).刑法總則.台北:三民.
18. 柯耀程(2009).刑事程序理念與重建.台北:元照.
19. 曹昌棋(2016)。追與不追千萬難─談警察追車造成傷亡的法律爭議。警專論壇，18，2-9。
20. 陳俊宏(2017)。警察攔車對不服稽查者追緝與否的探討。警察法學，16，109-140。
21. 褚劍鴻(2001).刑事訴訟法論（上冊）.台北:臺灣商務.
22. 蔡墩銘(2005).刑法精義.台北:翰蘆.

1. 方文宗(2021)。刑法正當事由效力位階之辯證。東海大學法學研究，61，1-39。
2. 林韻青,周博彬(2023)。警察執行巡邏與盤查之安全管理—論制度與科技之影響。中國行政評論，29(1)，83-106。