淺析紅色通報機制及其效力－以國際案例為例

A Study of the Red Notice Mechanism and Its Impact-Taking International Cases as Examples

楊婉莉(Yang, Wan-Li)

緊急逮捕 ； 紅色通報 ； 國際刑警組織 ； 引渡 ； 逮捕令 ； Provisional Arrest ； Red Notice ； Interpol ； Extradition ； Arrest Warrant

軍法專刊

66卷1期（2020 / 02 / 01）

107 - 149

繁體中文

近年來由於國際刑事合作密度增加，各國透過國家中央局轉請國際刑警組織發布紅色通報之個案，也隨之增多，加上該組織現有194個會員國，為僅次於聯合國最大的國際組織，國際影響力大，依紅色通報所進行之引渡合作，無疑是現今國際執法合作最大之利器之一；在此趨勢下，近幾年陸續發生國人在海外涉嫌從事跨境犯罪，而遭該組織發布紅色通報，進而遭第三國加以逮捕之個案，國人於海外人身自由受拘束之問題也因此備受重視，故有關紅色通報的效力以及其與引渡程序之關係，暨各國對紅色通報之立法政策及比較，均有研究之必要。本文就紅色通報機制以及其於各國內國法的效力，先予以比較探討，繼之以剛果訴比利時案以及Ocalan v Turkey案，探討紅色通報之性質及相關原則，最後就現行引渡制度之困境進行初步分析。

At the same time as international cooperation in criminal matters strengthened significantly via judicial and police channels, the number of cases for which each National Central Bureau (NCB) applied for an Interpol Red Notice also increased drastically. With a global membership of 194 countries, Interpol is the second largest political organization after the United Nations in terms of international representation. Therefore, the profound impact it has on the criminal law enforcement arena at both domestic and international levels will continue to influence how democracies enforce their own laws and rules. The extradition cooperation followed by the provisional arrest that is initiated by Interpol Red Notices is undoubtedly one of the most powerful but controversial tools used in international law enforcement cooperation. More than six hundred Taiwanese people suspected of engaging in cross-border telecom fraud had been extradited or repatriated to Mainland China since 2016, but it is unclear how many of whom had been put on the Interpol Red Notice of China's most-wanted list to initiate such action. However, such mass repatriation and extradition have given rise to concerns over human rights protection, as well as the transparency of the Red Notice mechanism. The relationship between provisional arrest under the Red Notice mechanism and its influence on domestic extradition procedures has attracted the full glare of press attention in the so-called ＂Greater China Economic Circle＂. This article first discusses the Interpol Red Notice mechanism and its influence on several jurisdictions at the domestic level, before turning to the international stage, where some international principles related to Red Notices are discussed. The case of Congo v. Belgium (ICJ) and the case of Ocalan v. Turkey (ECtHR), both of which relate to Red Notices, emerge as examples of balancing international law enforcement cooperation and human rights. Finally, some suggestions relating to the current extradition policy in Taiwan are addressed in this paper.

1. 王保鍵(2015)。混合法庭：國際刑法制度中追訴嚴重犯罪的新模式。人文及社會科學集刊，27(3)，507-546。
   連結：
2. 孟維德(2017)。國際情資交換與跨國犯罪偵防。刑事政策與犯罪防治研究專刊，12，3-15。
   連結：
3. 陳純一(2007)。國家豁免主體問題之研究。臺北大學法學論叢，61，126。
   連結：
4. 「歐盟成員國間逮捕令與移交程序框架決議」前言。
5. United States v. Spatola, 925 F.2d 615, 618 (2d Cir. 1991)
6. 「聯合國引渡示範條約」第9條。第2 條的第1 項。
7. Sidali v. INS, 107 F.3d 191, 196 (3d Cir. 1997)
8. 司法院釋字第708 號理由書第一段。
9. (2005)。葡萄牙第144/99號法律核准《國際刑事司法協助法》。澳門檢察，5，122-195。
10. Čalovskis v. Latvia, , Application no. 22205/13, [Fourth Section], 24 July 2014, at para.130
11. Öcalan v Turkey, Application no. 46221/99, [GC], 12 May 2005, at para.74, 12, 84, 96-97, 77, 81-82, 86, 88-89, 93
12. "Criminal Procedure Code of the Czech Republic," retrieved from: https://www.legislationline.org/documents/id/20036, lasted visited 2019-4-21.
13. Extradition Act 11 of 1996 of Republic of Namibia
14. 1994年8月6日在阿布加簽署「西非國家經濟共同體引渡公約」(the ECOWAS Convention on Extradition)A/P1/8/94 號。
15. the Fugitive Offenders Act of 1967
16. "Uganda 'Must Arrest' Rebel Leader," BBC,18 May 2006, retrieved from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4992896.stm, last visited 2019-4-21.
17. 「聯合國反貪腐公約」第44 條第10 項。
18. 「聯合國打擊跨國有組織犯罪公約」第16條第9項。
19. D.L. v Austria, Application no. 34999/16, [Fifth Section],7 December 2017, at para. 53.
20. 「羅馬規約」第53至61條和第86至102條。第87(1) (b)條。
21. 「國際刑警組織檔案管理委員會規約」（Statute of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL's Files）第3、4條規定。
22. 斯洛維尼亞「刑事訴訟法」第535 條 Article 535, "Criminal Procedure Act of the Republic of Slovenia", retrieved from: https://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/svn/criminal_procedure_act_of_slovenia_html/Slovenia_CriminalProcedure-Act2007.pdf, lasted visited 2019-11-19.
23. Kharis v. Sessions, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 190082, November 6, 2018, Case No. 18-cv-04800-JST.
24. 「引渡法」第12條第1項。
25. (2009).Press Release, Interpol, Interpol statement on Honduras President Manuel Zelaya (July 3, 2009).
26. 臺灣高等法院94 年度上重訴字第92 號刑事判決。
27. Valentine v. United States, 299 U.S. 5 (1936).
28. 聯合國經濟及社會理事會編號：E/CN.15/2014/12 文件；預防犯罪和刑事司法委員會於2014 年5 月12日至16 日在維也納舉行之第23 屆會議，臨時議程，專案4，關於刑事事項國際合作的專題討論的討論指南，頁10，註2。Retrieved from: https://www.unodc.org/documents/commissions/CCPCJ/CCPCJ_Sessions/CCPCJ_23/_E-CN15-2014-12/E-CN15-2014-12_C.pdf, last visited 2019-1-15.。
29. 原1987 年「中華民國政府與南非共和國政府間引渡條約」第14 條第2 項
30. Extradition Act 11 of Seychelles subsection (4) of Section 8
31. 澳門「刑事司法互助法」第3 條第7 款。
32. Model Treaty on Extradition, adopted by General Assembly resolution 45/116, subsequently amended by General Assembly resolution 52/88.
33. INTERPOL's Rules on the Processing of Data, IRPD；「資料處理規則」第1 條第14款、第78條第3項與第2章第4 節。Article 82。第83條第2 項b款v目。Article 84, 85, 86。第1條第14 款、第78條第3 項與第2章第4節。
34. (2019).Misuse of Interpol's Red Notices and impact on human rights - recent developments.Policy Department for External Relations, Directorate General for External Policies of the Union.
35. 原「中華民國與哥斯大黎加引渡條約」第9 條第2 項。第9 條第1 項
36. ASEAN, "Extradition Laws of Singapore- A Brief Overview," retrieved from: https://www.asean.org/wp-content/uploads/images/archive/documents/ExtraditionACTofSingapore.pdf, last visited 2019-04-18.
37. Association of Southeast Asian Nations=ASEAN(2010).ASEAN Handbook on International Legal Cooperation in Trafficking in Persons Cases.Jakarta:ASEAN Secretariat.
38. Bassiouni, M Cherif(2014).International Extradition : United States law and practice.New York:Oxford University Press.
39. Booth, Chloe S.(2018).Note: Doctrine on The Run: the Deepening Circuit Split Concerning Application of the Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine to Foreign Nationals.Boston College Law Review,59,1153-1158.
40. Damrosch, Lori F,Henkin, Louis,Murphy, Sean D.,Smit, Hans.International Law: Cases and Materials.Minnesota:The West Publishing Co..
41. David, Christopher,Hearn, Nicholas(2018).In Practice: Interpol red notices.Law Society Gazette,26.
42. Department of Justice of the United State, "Provisional Arrests and International Extradition Requests-Red, Blue, Or Green Notices,"retrieved from: https://www.justice.gov/jm/organization-and-functions-manual-3-provisional-arrests-and-international-extradition-requests, last visited 2019-02-2.
43. Department of Justice of the United State, "Interpol Red Notices," 9-15.635, Criminal Resource Manual, retrieved from: https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual, last visited 2019-5-11.
44. Department of Justice of the United State, "Frequently Asked Questions," retrieved from: https://www.justice.gov/interpol-washington/about-interpol-washington, last visited 2019-04-20.
45. Epps, Valerie,Graham, Lorie(2015).Examples & Explanations: International Law.New York:Wolters Kluwer Law & Business.
46. Gottlieb, Yaron(2011).Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution: Balancing International Police Cooperation with The Prohibition on Engaging in Political, Military, Religious, or Racial Activities.Florida Journal Of International Law,23,135-186.
47. International Court of Justice, "Dissenting Opinion of the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 of Judge Van Den Wyngaert,"retrieved from: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/121/121-20020214-JUD-01-09-EN.pdf, para. 2 and 78.
48. International Court of Justice," Dissenting Opinion of Judge Oda,"1 4 February 2002, retrieved from: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/121/121-20020214-JUD-01-02-EN.pdf. para.13.
49. International Court of Justice, "Declaration by Judge Oda,'' Order of 8 December 2000, retrieved from: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/121/121-20001208-ORD-01-01-EN.pdf
50. International Court of Justice, "Questions relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal),"J udgment of 20 July 2012, retrieved from: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/144, last visited 2019-02-28.
51. International Court of Justice, "Declaration by Judge ad hoc Van den Wyngaert," Order of 8 December 2000, retrieved from: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/121/121-20001208-ORD-01-07-EN.pdf
52. International Court of Justice, "Dissenting Opinion by Judge Rezek,'' Order of 8 December 2000, retrieved from: https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/121/121-20001208-ORD-01-05-EN.pdf, last visited 2019-04-28.
53. International Court of Justice, "Separate Opinion of the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2000 of Judge Rezek,"retrieved from:https://www.icj-cij.org/files/case-related/121/121-20020214-JUD-01-06-EN.pdf, last visited 2019-02-2.
54. International Court of Justice, "Case Concerning the Arrest Warrant Of 11 April 2000 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium) Judgment of 14 February 2002,"retrieved from: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/121/judgments, last visited 2019-02-2.
55. INTERPOL, "National Central Bureaus (NCBs)," retrieved from:https://www.interpol.int/en/Who-we-are/Member-countries/National-Central-Bureaus-NCBs, last visited 2019-4-20.
56. INTERPOL, "Annual Report 2017," retrieved from: https://www.interpol.int/News-and-media/Publications2/Annual-reports2, last visited 2019-1-15, at p.23.
57. INTERPOL, "Red Notices," retrieved from:https://www.interpol.int/INTERPOL-expertise/Notices/Red-Notices, last visited 2019-4-20.
58. INTERPOL, "Name and logo," retrieved from: https://www.interpol.int/en/Who-we-are/Legal-framework/Name-and-logo, last visited 2019-4-15.
59. INTERPOL, "Member countries," retrieved from: https://www.interpol.int/, last visited 2019-4-28
60. Interpol Fact Sheet, "International Notices System," COM/FS/2014-03/GI-02, 2014, retrieved from: https://www.justice.gov/interpol-washington/file/798736/download, last visited 2019-02-24.
61. Iraola, Roberto(2009).Foreign Extradition and In Absentia Convictions.Seton Hall Law Review,39(3),843-860.
62. Legal Resources for Hungary, "Hungary Law on International Assistance in Criminal Matters 1996," retrieved from: http://www.track.unodc.org/LegalLibrary/pages/LegalResources.aspx? country=Hungary, last visited 2017-12-1., Section 24
63. Marino, Nina,Grantham, Reed(2015).Feature, Wanted by Interpol Strategic Thinking about Red Notices, Diffusions and Extradition.Criminal Justice,30,4-10.
64. National Radio Company of Ukraine, All Data, Concerning Yulia Tymoshenko's Search, Withdrawn from Interpol System,2005, retrieved from: http://www.nrcu.gov.ua/index.php?id=148&listid=12985, last visited 2019-02-28.
65. Portuguese Public Prosecution Service,"Lei da Cooperacao Judiciaria Internacional em Materia Penal,"retrieved from: http://www.ministeriopublico.pt/iframe/lei-da-cooperacao-judiciaria-internacional-em-materia-penal, last visited 2019-02-28.
66. SADC, "The Southern African Development Community Protocol on Extradition,"retrieved from: http://www.sadc.int/documents-publications/show/Protocol%20on%20Extradition%20(2002),last visited 2017-4-1.
67. Savino, Mario(2011).Global Administrative Law Meets "Soft" Powers: The Uncomfortable Case of Interpol Red Notices.New York University Journal of International Law and Politics,43,263-336.
68. Semmelman, Jacques,Munson, Emily Spencer(2014).Feature: Interpol Red Notices and Diffusions: Powerful --and Dangerous -- Tools of Global Law Enforcement.Champion,38,28-38.
69. The Council of Europe, "Duration of Provisional Arrest with A View to Extradition,'' European Committee on Crime Problems, retrieved from: https://rm.coe.int/1680070bbc, last visited 2019-04-20.
70. The Federal Council of the Swiss government, "Federal Act on International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters," retrieved from: https://www.admin.ch/opc/en/classified-compilation/19810037/201301010000/351.1.pdf, last visited 2019-02-28.
71. The Law Library of Congress.,Global Legal Research Center.
72. The Law Library of Congress, "INTERPOL: Red Notices," Global Legal Research Center, at p.4, 8, retrieved from:https://www.loc.gov/law/help/archived-reports/interpol-red-notices.pdf, last visited 2019-4-20
73. The Organization of American States, "Peru Extradicion," retrieved from: http://www.oas.org/juridico/mla/sp/per/sp_per_MAR_JUR_EXT.pdf, last visited 2019-02-2.
74. The Parliament of the Republic of Namibia, "Extradition Act 11 of 1996," the Legal Database, retrieved from: https://laws.parliament.na/annotated-laws-regulations/law-regulation.php?id=371, last visited 2019-4-20.
75. The PoliceOne Network, "Interpol, Your Best Resource for International Investigations," 2000-9-3, retrieved from: https://www.policeone.com/investigations/articles/44463-Interpol-Your-Best-Resource-for-International-Investigations/,last visited 2019-04-20.
76. The University of Utah, "Number 23 of 1971 Criminal Procedure Code (as amended to 14 March 2010)", retrieved from: http://hrlibrary.umn.edu/research/Egypt/Criminal%20Procedures.pdf, last visited 2019-04-28.
77. United Nations(2006).United Nations Juridical Yearbook: Special Edition.
78. UNODC, "Extradition Act of Seychelle," retrieved from: https://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/syc/extradition-act-consolidated-june-2014_html/Seychelles_Extradition_Act.pdf, last visited 2019-2-28.
79. WIPO, "Codigo Procesal Penal (Decreto Legislativo N° 957 de 22 de julio de 2004," WIPO Lex, retrieved from: https://wipolex.wipo.int/en/text/202824, last visited 2019-4-20.
80. 王重陽(2009)。從比較法觀點看「海峽兩岸共同打擊犯罪及司法互助協議」。展望與探索，7(6)，110。
81. 李建良(2014)。論國際條約的國內法效力與法位階定序國際條約與憲法解釋之關係的基礎課題－國際條約與憲法解釋之關係的基礎課題。憲法解釋之理論與實務（第八輯上冊）
82. 孟維德(2017).跨國犯罪.五南圖書出版股份有限公司.
83. 姚岳宏，〈A 走7億元辛巴威男子在台被逮〉，《自由時報》，2011年8月18日，〈https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/society/paper/517323〉，最後瀏覽日：2019年4月20日。
84. 姚嫚翎(2018)。中央警察大學外事警察研究所。
85. 柯慶忠(2004)。我國在國際刑警組織的回顧與展望。警學叢刊，35(3)，208。
86. 柯慶忠(2011)。從美國引渡法制與國際實踐探討臺美洽簽引渡協定之問題。國土安全與國境管理學報，15，260。
87. 洪期榮(2013)。國立海洋大學海洋法律研究所。
88. 孫志佳(2015)。淺析紅色通緝令的法律性質與實施程序。南方論刊，9，33。
89. 張筱笛、陳伃軒，〈台人被中國大陸紅色通緝…〉，《自由時報》，2016年4月15日，〈http://news.ltn.com.tw/news/politics/paper/979596〉，最後瀏覽日：2018年11月18日。
90. 陳隆豐(2015)。國際刑事警察組織。新世紀智庫論壇，70，53-62。
91. 陳榮傑(1985).引渡之理論與實踐.三民書局股份有限公司.
92. 黃文志(2017)。INTERPOL 發布紅色通報的困境與挑戰。涉外執法與政策學報，8，181-204。
93. 黃風(2007).國際刑事司法合作的規則與實踐.北京大學出版社.
94. 黃風(2006)。國際引渡合作規則的新發展。比較法研究，3，29。
95. 廖炳棋，〈台警剋國際要犯？全球抓不到來台逃不了1個月〉，《聯合報》，2017 年8 月11 日，〈https://theme.udn.com/theme/story/6774/2635561〉，最後瀏覽日：2019年4 月20 日。
96. 薛淑蘭(2008).引渡司法審查研究.北京:中國大陸人民公安大學出版社.