2018 年秋天，人權事務委員會就《公政公約》第6 條生命權發布了第36號一般性意見，就國家於死刑的使用上有若干提醒。2019 年春天，我國一則涉及家庭暴力殺人案件之法院判決――即臺灣彰化地方法院107 年重訴字第13 號刑事判決――於個案量刑部分適用了這號最新一般性意見之論述，並依此推論出「情節最重大之罪僅適用於直接故意殺人態樣」以及「智能、精神障礙者不能判處死刑」二個觀點，實屬難得。這則判決應係我國法院首件實質適用該號一般性意見之司法判決。不過，《公政公約》第36 號一般性意見就死刑使用之闡述，當然不僅於此，尚有其他諸如公平審判、酷刑禁止等提示，而此等人權基準均有待未來司法實務更進一步的論述闡釋。

 

關鍵字：《公政公約》第36 號一般性意見、《公民與政治權利國際公約》、死刑、生命權、情節最重大之罪行、心智障礙者判死禁止

On 30 October 2018, the UN Human Rights Committee (HRC) finally adopted the long-awaited General Comment No. 36 (GC 36) on article 6

of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). In the spring of 2019, Taiwan Changhua District Court Judgment Chong-Su No. 13, which involved domestic abuse and murder, applied the statement of GC 36 to the section of sentencing, and made conclusions that “the most serious crimes shall only be applied to the condition of directly purposed murder” and “the death penalty shall not be imposed on mentally retarded persons”, which is amazingly rare. Also, this might have been the first case to do so. However, GC 36 on the use of death penalty is not limited to the above statements. Other standards of humanity like the guarantee of a fair trial and the prohibition on torture are still waiting for more application in, and interpretation by, the judicial system.

 

Keywords：Human Rights Committee General Comment No.36, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), death penalty, Right of Life, the most serious crimes, mentally retarded persons.