政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/152126
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  全文笔数/总笔数 : 113648/144635 (79%)
造访人次 : 51580528      在线人数 : 913
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
搜寻范围 查询小技巧：
  • 您可在西文检索词汇前后加上"双引号"，以获取较精准的检索结果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜寻，建议至进阶搜寻限定作者字段，可获得较完整数据
    •  进阶搜寻


    请使用永久网址来引用或连结此文件: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152126


    题名: 死刑 — 美國與臺灣《公民與政治權利國際公約》定期報告議之論述分析及比較
    On Death Penalty: A Comparative Discourse Analysis of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Periodic Report in the U.S. and Taiwan
    作者: 危瑪雅
    Wilkinson, Maria
    贡献者: 陳貞如
    Chen, Chen-Ju
    危瑪雅
    Wilkinson, Maria
    关键词: 判死刑
    演化條約解釋
    敘述
    台灣
    美國
    Death Penalty
    Evolutionary Treaty Interpretation
    Narratives
    Taiwan
    U.S.
    日期: 2024
    上传时间: 2024-07-01 13:24:55 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 《公民與政治權利國際公約》（ICCPR）第六條是為數不多聲明生存權並規定對死刑使用限制的具有約束力的國際人權條款之一。儘管《公民與政治權利國際公約》對死刑已有限制，隨著世界多國於法律與實踐中已廢除了死刑，聯合國人權事務委員會對於ICCPR在死刑量刑問題上應如何解釋不斷提出想法，隨後形成了對第 6 條的演變解釋。由於維持使用死刑的ICCPR成員國面臨人權事務委員會要求廢除死刑越來越大的壓力，本研究強調了美國和台灣這兩個保留死刑的國家形成的策略敘述。本研究以以下問題為主軸：台灣和美國政策制定者的敘述如何反映其國家對與死刑相關有針對性的壓力的反應？本研究的結果提供了在檢視應對這種壓力的兩種不同方法的同時，人權事務委員會如何監管與應用演變條約的見解。美國以清楚的二元論方式回應遵守條約，並援引國內法優先；台灣則尋求採取一元論方式，儘管不願採用人權事務委員會的演變解釋。本研究的結果為國際人權法律規範的制定和國內政治決策的複雜性提供見解。
    The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Article 6, is one of the few binding International Human Rights treaties that declare the right to life and stipulate limitations on the use of the death penalty. Despite the ICCPR’s limitations on the death penalty, as the death penalty has become largely abolished in law or practice worldwide, there are developing ideas from the United Nations (UN) Human Rights Committee (HRC) as to how the ICCPR shall be interpreted on matters of death penalty sentencing and subsequently, an evolved interpretation of Article 6 has formed. As party members to the ICCPR that maintain the use of the death penalty face rising pressure from the HRC to abolish the death penalty, this research underlines the strategic narratives formed by two retentionist states, the US and Taiwan. This research is guided by asking: How do the narratives of policymakers in Taiwan and the US reflect their countries’ response to targeted pressure in relation to the death penalty? The results of this research offer insights into how evolutionary interpretation of treaties are regulated and applied by the HRC while examining two different approaches to this pressure. While the US responds to treaty adherence in a clear dualistic approach, citing domestic law to take precedence, Taiwan seeks to adopt a monistic approach despite a reluctance to adopt HRC evolved interpretations. The results of this research offer insights into the complexities of international human rights legal norm setting and domestic political decision-making.
    參考文獻: Judicial Yuan. 111年度憲民字第904052號. Judicial Yuan.
    (Taiwan), Republic of China. Common Core Document Forming Part of the Reports Second Report under the Iccpr and Icescr, 2016.
    ———. Common Core Document Forming Part of the Reports Third Report on the Iccpr and Icescr, 2020.
    ———. Core Document Forming Part of the Reports, 2012.
    ———. Implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Initial Report Submitted under Article 40 of the Covenant 2012.
    ———. Implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Second Report Submitted under Article 40 of the Covenant 2016.
    ———. Implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Third Report Submitted under Article 40 of the Covenant, 2020.
    ———. List of Issues to Be Taken up in Connection with the Consideration of the Initial Report of Republic of China (Taiwan) Replies of Republic of China (Taiwan) to the List of Issues 2013.
    ———. Response to the Concluding Observations and Recommendations Adopted by the International Review Committee on January 20, 2017, 2020.
    Abi-Saab, Georges, Kenneth Keith, Gabrielle Marceau, and Clément Marquet. Evolutionary Interpretation and International Law. Bloomsbury Publishing, 2019.
    "The Abolitionist Movement." Death Penalty Information Center, accessed March 1, 2024, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/facts-and-research/history-of-the-death-penalty/the-abolitionist-movement.
    "Act to Implement the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ". edited by Ministry of Justice. Taiwan, 2009. https://law.moj.gov.tw/ENG/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=I0020028.
    Amidon, Ethan. "Politics and the Death Penalty: 1930–2010." American Journal of Criminal Justice 43 (2018): 831-60.
    Ash, Kristine. "Us Reservations to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Credibility Maximization and Global Influence." Nw. Univ. J. Int'l Hum. Rts. 3 (2005): xxxvi.
    "Attorney General Merrick B. Garland Imposes a Moratorium on Federal Executions; Orders Review of Policies and Procedures." news release., 2021, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-imposes-moratorium-federal-executions-orders-review.
    Banner, Stuart. The Death Penalty: An American History. Harvard University Press, 2002.
    Bjørge, Eirik. The Evolutionary Interpretation of Treaties. Oxford University Press, 2014.
    Chung, Li-hua. "Support for Death Penalty High: Poll." Taipei Times (Taiwan), September 13, 2022 2022. https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2022/09/13/2003785231.
    Code, Model Penal. "Model Penal Code." Section 210.6, 1962.
    Committee, UN Human Rights. "Ccpr General Comment No. 6: Article 6 (Right to Life)." 30 April 1982.
    ———. "General Comment No. 36, Article 6 (Right to Life)." UN Doc CCPR/C/GC/36 (3 September 2019) (2019).
    Congress, US. "S.735 - 104th Congress: Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996." 1995-1996. https://www.congress.gov/bill/104th-congress/senate-bill/735.
    Council, Economic and Social. Implementation of the Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty 1989/64. United Nations (1989).
    ———. Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty 1996/15. United Nations (1996).
    Crawford, James, and Ian Brownlie. Brownlie's Principles of Public International Law. Oxford University Press, USA, 2019.
    Economic, UN, and Social Council. "Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty." Resolution 50 (1984): 25.
    "Election 2024/Ministry Denies It Is Reluctant to Carry out Capital Punishment." Focus Taiwan 2024. https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202401050016.
    "Executions under the Federal Death Penalty." Death Penalty Information Center, accessed March 1, 2024, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/state-and-federal-info/federal-death-penalty/executions-under-the-federal-death-penalty.
    Fairclough, Norman. Analysing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. Psychology Press, 2003.
    Falleti, Tulia G. "Process Tracing of Extensive and Intensive Processes." New political economy 21, no. 5 (2016): 455-62.
    "Furman V. Georgia." Oyez, accessed March 5, 2024, https://www.oyez.org/cases/1971/69-5030.
    Futamura, Madoka. "The Politics of the Death Penalty and Contexts of Transition: Democratization, Peacebuilding and Transitional Justice." In The Politics of the Death Penalty in Countries in Transition, 13-28: Routledge, 2013.
    Garland, David. Peculiar Institution: America's Death Penalty in an Age of Abolition. OUP Oxford, 2010.
    Hobson, Christopher. "Democracy, Democratization and the Death Penalty." In The Politics of the Death Penalty in Countries in Transition, 29-46: Routledge, 2013.
    Hood, Roger, and Carolyn Hoyle. "Abolishing the Death Penalty Worldwide: The Impact of a “New Dynamic”." Crime and Justice 38, no. 1 (2009): 1-63.
    Human Rights Resolution 2005/59: The Question of the Death Penalty. Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, United Nations (2005).
    "Countries That Have Abolished the Death Penalty since 1976." accessed February 22, 2024, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/international/countries-that-have-abolished-the-death-penalty-since-1976.
    "International." Death Penalty Information Center, accessed February 22, 2024, https://deathpenaltyinfo.org/policy-issues/international.
    John, Arit. "A Timeline of the Rise and Fall of ‘Tough on Crime’ Drug Sentencing." The Atlantic, 2014. https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/04/a-timeline-of-the-rise-and-fall-of-tough-on-crime-drug-sentencing/360983/.
    "Jy Interpretation No. 392." edited by Judicial Yuan, December 22, 1995.
    "Jy Interpretation No. 549." edited by Judicial Yuan, August 2, 2002.
    "Jy Interpretation No. 578." edited by Judicial Yuan, May 21, 2004.
    Liao, Fort Fu-Te. "The Abolition of the Death Penalty in Taiwan: Why a De Facto Moratorium Was Established and Lost." Asia-Pac. J. on Hum. Rts. & L. 11 (2010): 1.
    ———. "From Seventy-Eight to Zero: Why Executions Declined after Taiwan's Democratization." Punishment & Society 10, no. 2 (2008): 153-70.
    Lin, Mao-hong. "Reconceptualizing Presidents' Clemency Power under the Framework of Human Rights: The Right to Seek Capital Clemency in Taiwan." Fordham International Law Journal 47, no. 1 (2024): 1.
    Lin, Tzu-Ti, Ming-Sung Kuo, and Hui-Wen Chen. "Seventy Years On: The Taiwan Constitutional Court and Judicial Activism in a Changing Constitutional Landscape." Hong Kong LJ 48 (2018): 995.
    Madison, James. "The United States Constitution." (1787).
    Miskimmon, Alister, Ben O'loughlin, and Laura Roselle. Strategic Narratives: Communication Power and the New World Order. Routledge, 2014.
    Moloo, Rahim. "Changing Times, Changing Obligations? The Interpretation of Treaties over Time." Paper presented at the Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting, 2012.
    "Most Americans Favor the Death Penalty Despite Concerns About Its Administration." June 2, 2021Pew Research Center, February 22, 2024. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2021/06/02/most-americans-favor-the-death-penalty-despite-concerns-about-its-administration/.
    Mukherjee, Amrita. "The Iccpr as a ‘Living Instrument’: The Death Penalty as Cruel, Inhuman and Degrading Treatment." The Journal of Criminal Law 68, no. 6 (2004): 507-19.
    Neumayer, Eric. "Death Penalty: The Political Foundations of the Global Trend Towards Abolition." Human rights review 9 (2008): 241-68.
    Oliphant, J. Baxter. "Support for Death Penalty Lowest in More Than Four Decades." Pew Research Center, March 1, 2024 2016. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2016/09/29/support-for-death-penalty-lowest-in-more-than-four-decades/.
    Ramcharan, Bertie G. The Right to Life in International Law. Vol. 3: BRILL, 2021.
    Report of the Council to the Membership of the American Law Institute on the Matter of the Death Penalty. The American Law Institute (2009). https://dpic-cdn.org/production/legacy/alicoun.pdf.
    Reservations and Declarations Made by State Parties of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (Iccpr) (as of 31 March 2017). Centre for Civil and Political Rights (2017). https://ccprcentre.org/files/media/List_of_ICCPR_reservations.pdf.
    Risse, Thomas, and Kathryn Sikkink. "The Socialization of International Human Rights Norms into Domestic Practices. Introduction." RELACIONES INTERNACIONALES-MADRID, no. 17 (2011): 185-223.
    Schabas, William. The Abolition of the Death Penalty in International Law. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
    Schmidt, Markus G. "Universality of Human Rights and the Death Penalty-the Approach of the Human Rights Committee." ILSA J. Int'l & Comp. L. 3 (1996): 477.
    Schneider, Victoria, and John Ortiz Smykla. "War and Capital Punishment." Journal of Criminal Justice 18, no. 3 (1990): 253-60.
    Shope, Mark L. "The Adoption and Function of International Instruments: Thoughts on Taiwan's Enactment of the Act to Implement the Iccpr and the Icescr." Ind. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 22 (2012): 159.
    Shui-bian, Chen. "Taiwan Stands Up: Toward the Dawn of a Rising Era." Republic of China Tenth-Term President Chen Shui-bian's Inauguration Address (2000): 142.
    State, United. Updated Core Document Forming Part of the Reports of the United States of America 2005.
    States, United. Common Core Document of the United States of America: Submitted with the Fourth Periodic Report of the United States of America to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights Concerning the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Annex a to the Common Core Document of the United States: State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Human Rights Organizations and Programs, 2011.
    ———. Fifth Periodic Report Submitted by the United States of America under Article 40 of the Covenant Pursuant to the Optional Reporting Procedure, Due in 2020 : International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 2021.
    ———. Fourth Periodic Report of the United States of America to the United Nations Committee on Human Rights Concerning the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2011.
    ———. Initial Reports of States Parties Due in 1993 : United States of America, 1994.
    ———. List of Issues to Be Taken up in Connection with the Consideration of the Second and Third Periodic Reports of the United States of America 2006.
    ———. Observations of the United States of America on the Human Rights Committee’s Draft General Comment No. 36 on Article 6 - Right to Life, 2017.
    ———. Second and Third Periodic Report of the United States of America to the Un Committee on Human Rights Concerning the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights 2005.
    Su, Kai-Ping. "Why the State Stops to Kill: The Death Penalty and the Rule of Law in Taiwan." Berkeley J. Crim. L. 23 (2018): 110.
    Suebsaeng, Asawin, and Patrick Reis. "Trump’s Killing Spree: The inside Story of His Race to Execute Every Prisoner He Could." The Rolling Stone, 2023. https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-capital-punishment-brandon-bernard-lisa-montgomery-1234664126/.
    Taylor, Paul M. A Commentary on the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: The Un Human Rights Committee's Monitoring of Iccpr Rights. Cambridge University Press, 2020.
    Un Human Rights Committee: Concluding Observations: Uganda. (2004).
    United States Written Responses to Questions from the United Nations Human Rights Committee Concerning the Fourth Periodic Report. United States, 2013.
    "Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties." In 1155 UNTS 331, UN Doc. A/Conf.39/27, 8 ILM 679 (1969), 63 AJIL 875 (1969), edited by United Nations. New York, 1969.
    Wallace, Rebecca MM, and Olga Martin-Ortega. International Law. Sweet and Maxwell, 2020.
    Waters, Melissa A. "Creeping Monism: The Judicial Trend toward Interpretive Incorporation of Human Rights Treaties." Colum. L. Rev. 107 (2007): 628.
    Whitehurst, Lindsay. "Mass Shooting at Buffalo Supermarket Now Justice Department’s First Death Penalty Case under Garland." AP News, 2024. https://apnews.com/article/buffalo-supermarket-shooting-death-penalty-justice-department-0efd37a5a4fe5f4786695d01a718c132.
    林慈偉. "論公民與政治權利國際公約生命權概念於我國刑事司法之實踐." (2014).
    "赦免法." edited by Legisative Yuan. Taiwan, 1991. https://law.moj.gov.tw/LawClass/LawAll.aspx?pcode=C0010005.
    描述: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    國際研究英語碩士學位學程(IMPIS)
    111862022
    資料來源: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111862022
    数据类型: thesis
    显示于类别:[國際研究英語碩士學位學程] 學位論文

    文件中的档案:

    档案 描述 大小格式浏览次数
    202201.pdf1323KbAdobe PDF0检视/开启


    在政大典藏中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - 回馈