Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/155375
|
| Title: | 刑事司法減害的毒品政策─走出病犯體制的旋轉門
Drug Policy Toward Harm Reduction of Criminal Justice: Exit the Revolving Doors of the Patient-Criminal System |
| Authors: | 林俊儒
Lin, Jun-Ru |
| Contributors: | 謝如媛
Hsieh, Ju-Yuan
林俊儒
Lin, Jun-Ru |
| Keywords: | 病犯
減害
個人使用
再犯控制
問題化
法律歸因
刑事裁決
戒癮治療
觀察勒戒
復元
Patient-Criminal
harm reduction
personal use
recidivism control
problematization
legal attribution
criminal ruling
addiction treatment
observation and rehabilitation
recovery |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2025-02-04 15:16:48 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 聚焦刑事司法「如何」形塑毒品使用者，本書首先描述病犯體制的生成，指出1998年《毒品危害防制條例》施行之後，治療行動在刑事機構拓展、治療命令在刑事處分形塑的過程，呈現其法制圖像。接著，探索2016年後的政策走向，從而問題化政策，並且描繪剛柔並濟毒品政策的框架。進而，從典型案例出發，以刑事裁決為素材，提出政策的分析架構。
其次，進入病犯體制探討刑事司法「想像中的病人」，從追逐治療的刑事處分、再犯控制的刑事責任，就刑事處分、刑事程序、分流配對機制檢驗病犯體制的運作，指出刑事司法提供治療的障礙。此外，從成癮現象規範化的角度，說明浮動刑事責任呈現的線性個人責任，如何影響臨床責任概念的運作、如何帶來懲罰與遺棄，提示維持病犯體制需要付出的代價。
接著，走入禁毒體制探討刑事司法「想像中的犯人」，從刑事立法、司法解釋、證據採納的角度出發，以憲法解釋、法院判決、立法條文為素材分析。從而，探討栽種大麻與運輸毒品的自用條款、解釋取得毒品過程招致的各項刑事規制，指出以「施用毒品」、「促進毒品流通」概念區分建構的二分體制，如何對於毒品使用者產生不當的對待。
再者，直面非法物質與刑事司法的關係，從減害理論的內涵出發、探索刑事司法減害的意義，劃定毒品使用者「非應承受的苦難」的界線，作為國家致力於減少毒品政策所生刑事司法傷害的理論基礎。此外，重訪施用毒品犯罪化的立法論述，理解刑事司法存在的前提因素，進而主張在福祉與自由之間探索「非」刑事司法的干涉手段，為復元理論提供立論基礎。
最後，詮釋毒品使用者、政策制定者如何受困於「法律製造」的旋轉門，指出刑事司法干預毒品使用者的益處與限制，根本性地探索刑事司法的成癮法制。以毒品使用者與政策制定者並肩而行的立場，主張應邁開刑事司法減害的步伐、探索非刑事司法的干涉手段，進行更具有價值意義的政策討論，持續辯證人、物質與國家的關係，並藉此展望未來的法制。
Focusing on how criminal justice shapes drug users, this book first describes the formation of the Patient-Criminal system. It outlines the expansion of treatment actions in criminal institutions and the shaping of treatment orders in criminal dispositions following the implementation of the Narcotics Hazard Prevention Act in 1998, presenting its legal landscape. It then explores policy directions post-2016, problematizing policies and delineating the framework of the drug policy approach of strength and gentleness. Using typical cases and criminal rulings as material, it proposes an analytical framework for policy.
Next, delving into the Patient-Criminal system, it examines the "imagined patient" in criminal justice. Through criminal dispositions pursuing treatment and criminal responsibility controlling recidivism, it scrutinizes the operation of the Patient-Criminal system via criminal dispositions, procedures, and diversion mechanisms, highlighting obstacles in providing treatment within criminal justice. Additionally, from the perspective of addiction normalization, it explicates how fluctuating criminal responsibility presents linear personal responsibility, affecting clinical responsibility concepts and leading to punishment and abandonment, indicating the cost of maintaining the Patient-Criminal system.
This book then enters the prohibition system to explore the "imagined criminal" in criminal justice. Analyzing constitutional interpretations, court decisions, and legislative texts, it examines the personal use clauses for cannabis cultivation and drug transportation, and interprets various criminal regulations incurred in obtaining drugs. It points out how the dichotomous system, constructed by distinguishing between "drug use" and "facilitating drug circulation," inappropriately treats drug users.
Furthermore, directly addressing the relationship between illicit substances and criminal justice, it explores the meaning of harm reduction in criminal justice based on harm reduction theory. It delineates the boundaries of "undeserved suffering" for drug users as a theoretical foundation for the state's efforts to reduce criminal justice harms stemming from drug policies. Additionally, it revisits the legislative discourse on criminalizing drug use, understanding the prerequisite factors for criminal justice, and advocates exploring non-criminal justice interventions between welfare and liberty, providing a theoretical basis for recovery theory.
Finally, it interprets how drug users and policymakers are trapped in the "legally manufactured" revolving door, pointing out the benefits and limitations of criminal justice intervention for drug users, fundamentally exploring addiction jurisprudence in criminal justice. From the concurrent perspectives of drug users and policymakers, it advocates for advancing harm reduction in criminal justice and exploring non-criminal justice interventions, engaging in more meaningful policy discussions, continuously dialectically examining the relationships between people, substances, and the state, and thereby envisioning future legal systems. |
| Reference: | 英文部分
1. Ashcroft, John., Daniels Deborah., Herraiz Domingo. 1997. Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/bja/205621.pdf (last visited: Dec. 30, 2024).
2. Ashworth, Andrew & Zedner, Lucia. 2008. Defending the Criminal Law: Reflections on the Changing Character of Crime, Procedure, and Sanctions. Criminal Law and Philosophy 2(1):21-51.
3. Babor, Thomas., Caulkins, Jonathan., Edwards, Griffith. Fischer, Benedikt., Foxcroft, David., Humphreys, Keith., Obot, Isidore., Rehm, Jürgen., Reuter, Peter., Room, Robin., Rossow, Ingeborg., Strang, John. 2009. Health and social services for drug users: systems issue. Pp. 235-248 in Drug Policy and the Public Good, edited by Thomas Babor. Oxford University Press.
4. Bacchi, Carol. 2018. Drug Problematizations and Politics: Deploying a Poststructural Analytic Strategy. Contemporary Drug Problems 45(1):3-14.
5. Bacon, Matthew. 2023. From criminalisation to harm reduction? The forms and functions of police drug diversion in England and Wales, An International Journal of Research and Policy 34(3):105-123.
6. Bacon, Matthew., Spicer, Jack. 2022. Harm Reduction Policing: Conceptualisation and implementation. Pp. 13-38 in Drug Law Enforcement, Policing and Harm Reduction, edited by Matthew Bacon & Jack Spicer. London: Routledge.
7. Barbosa, Joana., Marques, João. 2023. The revolving door phenomenon in severe psychiatric disorders: A systematic review, International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 69(5): 1075-1089.
8. Baumeister, Roy. 2017. Addiction, cigarette smoking, and voluntary control of action: Do cigarette smokers lose their free will? Addictive Behaviors Reports 5: 67-84.
9. Bechara, Antonie. 2005. Decision making, impulse control and loss of willpower to resist drugs: a neurocognitive perspective. Nature Neuroscience 8(11):1458-1463.
10. Belenko, Steven., Hiller, Matthew., Hamilton, Leah. 2013. Treating Substance Use Disorders in the Criminal Justice System. Current Psychiatry Reports 15(11):414-425.
11. Bernstein, Scott., Amirkhani, Emily., Werb, Dan., MacPherson, Donald. 2020. The regulation project: Tools for engaging the public in the legal regulation of drugs, International Journal of Drug Policy 86, 1-20.
12. Best, David & Aston, Elizabeth. 2015. Long-term recovery from addiction: Criminal justice involvement and positive criminology? Pp. 177-193 in Positive Criminology, edited by Natti Ronel, Dana Segev eds. London: Routledge.
13. Bjerk, David. 2017. Mandatory Minimums and the Sentencing of Federal Drug Crimes, The Journal of Legal Studies 46(1):124-125.
14. Blais, Etienne., Brisson, Jacinthe. Gagnon, François. Lemay, Sophie-Anne. 2022. Diverting people who use drugs from the criminal justice system: A systematic review of police-based diversion measures. International Journal of Drug Policy 105, 1-45.
15. Bonnie, Richard. 2002. Responsibility for Addiction. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law 30:405-413.
16. Bowlin, Shianne. 2020. Resolving the Overlooked Tragedy in Correctional Facilities, Lincoln Memorial University Law Review, 8:358-398.
17. Brandenburg, Daphne & Strijbos, Derek. 2020. The Clinical Stance and the Nurturing Stance: Therapeutic Responses to Harmful Conduct by Service Users in Mental Healthcare. Philosophy, Psychiatry, & Psychology 27(4):379-394.
18. Brecht, Mary., Anglin, Deidre., Wang, Junmei. 1993. Treatment effectiveness for legally coerced versus voluntary methadone maintenance clients. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse 19(1):89–106.
19. Brown, Kate & Wincup, Emma. 2020. Producing the vulnerable subject in English drug policy, International Journal of Drug Policy 80:1-8.
20. Buchanan, Julian., Young, L. 2000. The War on Drugs-a war on drug users, Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 7(4) 409-422.
21. Burns, Stacy & Peyrot, Mark. 2003. Tough Love: Nurturing and Coercing Responsibility and Recovery in California Drug Courts. Social Problems 50(3):416-438.
22. Caulkins, Jonathan., & Kleiman, Mark. 2011. Drugs and Crime. Pp.1-33 in The Oxford Handbook of Crime and Criminal Justice, edited by Michael Tonry. Oxford University Press.
23. Caulkins, Jonathan., Reuter, Peter. 2009. Towards a harmreduction approach to enforcement, Safer Communities 8(1):9-23.
24. Charland, Louis. 2011. Decision-Making Capacity and Responsibility. Pp.139-159 in Addiction and Responsibility, edited by Jeffrey Poland and George Graham. MIT Press.
25. Charland, Louis. 2020 A Puzzling Anomaly: Decision-Making Capacity and Research on Addiction. Pp.1-26 in The Oxford Handbook of Research Ethics, edited by Ana Iltis and Douglas MacKay.
26. Chen, Chuan-Yu., Hsieh, Tan-Wen., Rei, Wenmay., Huang, Cheng-Hsiung., & Wang, Sheng-Chang. 2024. Association between socioeconomic and motherhood characteristics with receiving community‑based treatment services among justice‑involved young female drug users: a retrospective cohort study in Taiwan. Harm Reduction Journal, 21, 109.
27. Christiea, Timothy., Groarke, Louis., Sweet, William. 2008. Virtue ethics as an alternative to deontological and consequential reasoning in the harm reduction debate, International Journal of Drug Policy 19(1):52-58.
28. Cloud, William., Granfield, Robert. 2008. Conceptualizing recovery capital: Expansion of a theoretical concept. Substance Use and Misuse, 43(12-13):1971-1986.
29. Cohen, Aliza., Vakharia, Sheila., Netherland, Julie., Frederique, Kassandra. 2022. How the war on drugs impacts social determinants of health beyond the criminal legal system, Annals of Medicine 54(1), 1-15.
30. Cohen, Andrew., Glod, William. 2017. Why Paternalists and Social Welfarists Should Oppose Criminal Drug Laws. Pp. 225-241 in Rethinking Punishment in the Era of Mass Incarceration, edited by Chris Surprenant. Routledge.
31. Collins, Alexandra., Boyd, Jade., Cooper, Hannah., McNeil, Ryan. 2019. The intersectional risk environment of people who use drugs, Social Science & Medicine, 234:1-10.
32. Collins, Eric. 2021. The Problems of Problems-Solving Courts, UC Davis Law Review 54:1573-1629.
33. Collins, Susan., Clifasefi, Seema., Logan, Diane., Samples, Laura., Somers, Julian., Marlatt, Gordon. 2012. Current status, historical highlights, and basic principles of harm reduction. Pp. 3-35 in Harm Reduction: Pragmatic Strategies for Managing High-Risk Behaviors, Second Edition, edited by Gordon Marlatt, Mary Larimer, and Katie Witkiewitz. The Guilford Press.
34. Collins, Susan., Witkiewitz, Katie. 2020. Abstinence Violation Effect. Pp.8-9 in Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine, edited by Marc Gellman, Rick Turner.
35. Comartin, Erin., Nelson, Victoria., Smith, Scott., Kubiak, Sheryl. 2021. The Criminal/Legal Experiences of Individuals with Mental Illness along the Sequential Intercept Model: An Eight-Site Study. Criminal Justice and Behavior 48(1):76-95.
36. Conard, Peter, and Schneider, Joseph. 1980. Deviance and Medicalization: From badness to sickness. Temple University Press.
37. Conard, Peter. 1992. Medicalization and Social Control. Annual Review of Sociology 18:209-232.
38. Conard, Peter. 2013. Medicalization: Changing Contours, Characteristics, and Contexts. Pp.195-214 in Medical Sociology on the Move: New Directions in Theory, edited by W. Cockerham.
39. Coomber, Ross., Moyle, Leah. 2014. Beyond drug dealing: Developing and extending the concept of ‘social supply’ of illicit drugs to ‘minimally commercial supply’. Drugs: education, prevention and policy 21(2):158.
40. Crime Survey for England and Wales. 2013. Drug Misuse: Findings from the 2012 to 2013 Crime Survey for England Wales.
41. Curtis, Ric., Wendel, Travis. 2000. Toward the development of a typology of illegal drug markets. Crime Prevention. 11:121-152.
42. Wexler, David. 2014. New Wine in New Bottles: The Need to Sketch a Therapeutic Jurisprudence “Code” of Proposed Criminal Processes and 157 Practice. Arizona Summit Law Review 7: 463-480.
43. Davis, Joseph. 2009. Medicalization, Social Control, and the Relief of Suffering. Pp.211-241 in The New Blackwell Companion to Medical Sociology, edited by W. Cockerham. UK: Oxford.
44. Dea, Shannon. 2020. Toward a Philosophy of Harm Reductions, Health Care Analysis 28(4):302-313.
45. Debbaut, Steven. 2022. The legitimacy of criminalizing drugs: Applying the ‘harm principle’ of John Stuart Mill to contemporary decision-making, International Journal of Law, Crime and Justice, 68:1-12.
46. Dertadian, George., Askew, Rebecca. 2024. Towards a social harm approach in drug policy. International Journal of Drug Policy 127:1-10.
47. Dorn, Nicholas., Murji, Karim., South, Nigel. 1992. Traffickers: Drug Markets and Law Enforcement, xiii. Taylor & Francis.
48. Duffy, James. 2011. Problem-Solving Courts, Therapeutic Jurisprudence and the Constitution: If Two is Company, is Three a Crowd?, Melbourne University Law Review 35(2):394-425.
49. Dworkin, Gerald. 1972. Paternalism, The Moist 56(1):64-84.
50. Dworkin, Gerald. 2020. Paternalism. In Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, ed. Edward Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2020/entries/paternalism/ (last visited: Dec. 30, 2024).
51. Dworkin, Ronald. 2000. Sovereign Virtue: The Theory and Practice of Equality.
52. Earl, Jennifer. 2008. "The Process Is the Punishment": Thirty Years Later, Law & Social Inquiry 33(3):737-778.
53. El-Sabawi, Taleed. 2023. Death by Withdrawal, Florida International University Legal Studies Research Paper 23(7):46-47.
54. Engel, George. 1977. The need for a new medical model: a challenge for biomedicine. Science 196(4286):129-136.
55. European Council, Framework decision 2004/757 - Minimum provisions on the constituent elements of criminal acts and penalties in the field of illicit drug trafficking (2004).
56. European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction. Drug trafficking penalties across the European Union: a survey of expert opinion (2017).
57. Ewald, Robert. 2017. Expert Testimony and Opinion Evidence in a Narcotics Prosecution, Faculty Works: Criminal Justice and Legal Studies 2:1-6.
58. Ezard, Nadine. 2001. Public health, human rights and the harm reduction paradigm: from risk reduction to vulnerability reduction, International Journal of Drug Policy 12(3):207-219.
59. Feely, Malcolm. 1979. The Process is the Punishment: handling cases in a lower criminal court. New York : Russell Sage Foundation.
60. Feinberg, Joel. 1986. Harm to Self.
61. Fisher, Caitlinrose. 2014. Treating the Disease or Punishing the Criminal?: Effectively Using Drug Court Sanctions To Treat Substance Use Disorder and Decrease Criminal Conduct, Minnesota Law Review 99(2):747-781.
62. Flacks, Simon. 2023. Who is the Addict-Offender? A Historical Ontology, Social & Legal Studies 33(2):149-167.
63. Franco, Celinda. 2010. Drug Courts: Background, Effectiveness, and Policy Issues for Congress, Congressional Research Service.
64. Fraser, Suzanne., Moore, David., Keane, Helen. 2014. Habits: Remaking Addiction. Palgrave Macmillan London.
65. Garrido, Angel. & Saraiva, Filipa. 2012. Understanding the revolving door syndrome. European Psychiatry 27, 1-1.
66. Geppert, Cynthia. & Bogenschutz, Michael. 2009. Ethics in Substance Use Disorder Treatment, Psychiatric Clinics of North America, 32(2):283-297.
67. Global Commission on Drug Policy. 2011. The War on Drugs, https://www.globalcommissionondrugs.org/reports/the-war-on-drugs. (last visited: Dec. 30, 2024).
68. Goldberg, Anna. 2020. The (in)Significance of the Addiction Debate. Neuroethics 13(3):311-324.
69. Goldstein, Paul. 1985. The Drugs/Violence Nexus: The Tripartite Conceptual Framework. Journal of Drug Issues 15(4):493-506.
70. Gostin, Lawrence. 1991. Compulsory Treatment for Drug-Dependent Persons: Justifications for a Public Health Approach to Drug Dependency, The Milbank Quarterly 69(4):561-593.
71. Gostin, Lawrence., Gostin, Kieran. 2009. A Broader Liberty: JS Mill, Paternalism, and the Public’s Health. Public Health 123(3):214-21.
72. Greer, Alissa., Bonn, Matt., Ritter, Alison., Shane, Caitlin., Stevens, Alex., and Tousenard, Natasha. 2021. The details of decriminalization: Designing a non-criminal response to the possession of drugs for personal use, International Journal of Drug Policy 102:103605.
73. Greer, Alissa., Bonn, Matt., Shane, Caitlin., Stevens, Alex., Tousenard, Natasha., Ritter, Alison. 2022. The details of decriminalization: Designing a non-criminal response to the possession of drugs for personal use, International Journal of Drug Policy 102:103605.
74. Grisso, Thomas & Appelbaum, Paul. 1998. Assessing Competence to Consent to Treatment: A Guide for Clinicians and Other Health Professionals. New York: Oxford University Press.
75. Guido, Salvatore. 2020. Mill on Paternalism and Happiness, The Macksey Journal 79(1):1-20.
76. Gutierrez, Daniel., Dorais, Stephanie., Goshorn, Jeremy. 2020. Recovery as Life Transformation: Examining the Relationships between Recovery, Hope, and Relapse. Substance Use & Misuse 55(12), 1949-1957.
77. Haffajee, Rebecca., Cherney, Samantha., Smart, Rosanna. 2020. Legal requirements and recommendations to prescribe naloxone, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 209: 107896.
78. Halfmann, Drew. 2011. Recognizing medicalization and demedicalization: Discourses, practices, and identities. Health 2:1-22.
79. Hall, Wayne., Carter, Adrian and Forlini, Cynthia. 2015. The brain disease model of addiction: is it supported by the evidence and has it delivered on its promises?. The Lancent 2(1):105-110.
80. Hamilton, Melissa. 2015. Risk-Needs Assessment: Constitutional and Ethical Challenges, American Criminal Law Review 51:231-291.
81. Hammer, Rachel., Dingel, Molly., Ostergren, Jenny., Partridge, Brad., McCormick, Jennifer., & Koening, Barbara. 2013. Addiction: Current Criticism of the Brain Disease Paradigm. AJOB Neuroscience 4(3):27-32.
82. Harm Reduction International. What is harm reduction?, available at https://www.hri.global/what-is-harm-reduction (last visited: Dec. 30, 2024).
83. Harris, Shana. 2021. Possessing Drugs, Possessing Rights: Harm Reduction and Drug Policy Reform in Argentina, Contemporary Drug Problems 48(3):260-275.
84. Harrison, Lana. 2001. The Revolving Prison Door for Drug-Involved Offenders: Challenges and Opportunities, Crime & Delinquency 47(3): 462-485.
85. Hathaway, Andrew. 2001. Shortcomings of harm reduction: toward a morally invested drug reform strategy. International Journal of Drug Policy 12:125-137.
86. Hayman, Gene. 2009. Addiction: A Disorder of Choice. Harvard University Press.
87. Hayman, Gene. 2013. Addiction and choice: theory and new data. Front Psychiatry 4(31):1-5.
88. Hesse, Morten., Thylstrup, Birgitte., Nielsen, Anette. 2016. Matching Patients to Treatments or Matching Interventions to Needs. Pp. 287-301 in The SAGE Handbook of Drug & Alcohol Studies, edited by Torsten Kolind, Betsy Thom, Geoffrey Hunt.
89. Hillyard, Paddy., Pantazis, Christina. Tombs, Steve. Gordon, Dave. 2004. Beyond Criminology: Taking Harm Seriously.
90. Hirst, Daniel. 2020. Drug Policy, Paternalism and the Limits of Government Intervention. International Journal of Political Theory 4(1):54-73.
91. Holland, Adam. 2020. An ethical analysis of UK drug policy as an example of a criminal justice approach to drugs: a commentary on the short film Putting UK Drug Policy into Focus, Harm Reduction Journal, 17(1):97.
92. Hora, Peggy. 2011. Courting New Solutions Using Problem-Solving Justice: Key Components, Guiding Principles, Strategies, Responses, Models, Approaches, Blueprints and Tool Kits, Chapman Journal of Criminal Justice 2(1):7-52.
93. Hora, Peggy., Schma, William., Rosenthal John. 1999. Therapeutic Jurisprudence and the Drug Treatment Court Movement: Revolutionizing the Criminal Justice System 's Response to Drug Abuse and Crime in America. Notre Dame Law Review 74(2):439-538.
94. Hough, Mike., Warburton, Hamish., Few, Bradley., May, Tiggey., Lan-Ho Man, John Witton and Paul J Turnbull. 2000. A growing market: The domestic cultivation of cannabis, 9-11 (York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation).
95. Hser, Yih-ing., Polinsky, Margaret., Maglione, Margaret., Anglin, Douglas. 1999. Matching clients' needs with drug treatment services. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 16(4):299-305.
96. Hueston, Jamey. Sanctions and Incentives: A Review of What Works and Why. http://www.wellnesscourts.org/files/Sanctions%20%20Incentives%20JHueston%20.pdf (last visited: Dec. 30, 2024).
97. Humphreys, Keith., Shover, Chelsea., Andrews, Christina. et al. 2022. Responding to the opioid crisis in North America and beyond: recommendations of the Stanford-Lancet Commission. Lancet. 399:555–604.
98. Hunt, Neil. 2004. Public health or human rights: what comes first?, International Journal of Drug Policy 15(4):231-237.
99. Irwin, Kevin., Fry, Craig. 2007. Strengthening drug policy and practice through ethics engagement, International Drug Policy 18(2), 75-83.
100. Jarlais, Don. 2017. Harm Reduction in the USA: the research perspective and an archive to David Purchase, Harm Reduction Journal, 14:51.
101. Jia-shin, Chen. 2016. Harm reduction policy in Taiwan: toward a comprehensive understanding of its making and effects, Harm Reduction Journal, 13:11.
102. Joseph, Herman., Stancliff, Sharon., Langrod, John. 2000. Methadone Maintenance Treatment (MMT): A Review of Historical and Clinical Issues, Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine 67(5-6):347-364.
103. Kammersgaard, Tobias. 2019. Harm Reduction Policing: From Drug Law Enforcement to Protection. Contemporary Drug Problems 46(4)345-362.
104. Kassa, Kathleen. 2024. Reducing Harm: The Legal Viability of Supervised Consumption Sites in Georgias, Georgia State University Law Reivew 40(2):475.
105. Kaye, Kerwin. 2020. Enforcing Freedom: Drug Courts, Therapeutic Communities, and the Intimacies of the State. Columbia University Press.
106. Kennett, Jeanette. 2013. Just Say No? Addiction and the Elements of Self-Control. Pp144-164 in Addiction and Self-Control: Perspectives from Philosophy, Psychology, and Neuroscience, edited by Neil Levy. Oxford University Press.
107. Kennett, Jeanette., Vincent, Nicole. and Snoek, Anke. 2014. Drug Addiction and Criminal Responsibility. Pp1065-1083 in Handbook of Neuroethics, edited by Neil Levy & Jens Clausen. Dordrecht: Springer.
108. Kim, Scott. 2010. Evaluation of Capacity to Consent to Treatment and Research, Oxford University Press.
109. Kim, Soo. 2022. Paternalism, respect and dialogue, Philosophy and Social Criticism 49(4):492-517.
110. King, Nicholas. 2020. Harm Reduction: A Misnomer, Health Care Analysis 28 (4):324-334.
111. Kleinig, John. 2007. The Ethics of Harm Reduction, Substance Use & Misuse 43(1):1-16.
112. Kleinig, John. 2008. Harm Reduction: Ethics, Substance Use & Misuse 43(1):1-16.
113. Kleinig, John. 2008. Recovery as an Ethical Ideal, Substance Use & Misuse, 43(12-13):1685-1703.
114. Kohler-Hausman, Issa. 2018. Misdemeanorland: Criminal Courts and Social Control in an Age of Broken Windows Policing. Princeton University Press.
115. Kolla, Gillian. & Strike, Carol. 2020. Practices of care among people who buy, use, and sell drugs in community settings, Harm Reduction Journal 17(1):27-39.
116. Lacey, Nicola. & Pickard, Hanna. 2021. Why Standing to Blame May Be Lost but Authority to Hold Accountable Retained: Criminal Law as a Regulative Public Institution, The Monist 104:265-280.
117. Lancaster, Kari & Rhodes, Tim. 2020. Towards an ontological politics of drug policy: Intervening through policy, evidence and method. International Journal of Drug Policy 8:1-6.
118. Larimer, Mary., Palmer, Rebekka., Marlat, Alan. 1999. Relapse prevention: an overview of Marlatt’s cognitive-behavioral model. Alcohol Research & Health, 23(2):151-160.
119. Leonard, Lynne. & Germain, Andrée. 2016. Power, politics and the production of harm: a critical look at the intersecting, yet unequal, roles of scientific evidence, power, and politics in the provision of harm reduction services for people who smoke crack. Pp. 54 in Critical Approaches to Harm Reduction, edited by Christopher Smith & Zack Marshall.
120. Leshner, Ala. 1997. Addiction is a Brain Disease, and It Matters. Science 278 (5335):45-47.
121. Levenson, Jeremy., Textor, Lauren., Bluthenthal, Ricky., Darby, Anna. Wahbi, Rafik., Mark-Anthony Clayton-Johnson. 2023. Abolition and harm reduction in the struggle for “Care, Not Cages”, International Journal of Drug Policy, 121:1-7.
122. Levy, Neil. 2011. Resisting Weakness of the Will, LXXXII, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research (82)1:134-155.
123. Lewis, Clive. 1971. The Humanitarian Theory of Punishment. Pp. 224-230 in God in the Dock: Essays on Theology. Eerdmans Pub Co.
124. Lewis, Marc. 2015. The Biology of Desire: Why Addiction Is Not a Disease. Public Affairs.
125. Lewis, Marc. 2017. Brain Change in Addiction as Learning, Not Disease. The New England Journal of Medicine 379(16):1551-1560.
126. Lewis, Marcs. 2017. Addiction and the Brain: Development, Not Disease, Neuroethics 10(1):7-18.
127. Logan, Wayne. 2014. After Cheering Stopped: Decriminalization and Legalism’s Limits. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 24(2):319-351.
128. Longley, Joseph., Weizman, Shelly., Brown, Somer., LaBelle, Regina. 2023. A National Snapshot Update: Access to Medications for Opioid Use Disorder in U.S. Jails and Prisons, 11.
129. Longshore, Douglas., Turner, Susan., Wenzel, Suzanne., Morral, Andrew., Harrell, Adele., McBride, Duane., Deschenes, Elizabeth., and Iguchi, Martin. 2001. Drug Courts: A Conceptual Framework. Journal of Drug Issues 31(1):7-26.
130. Lucas, Kyle. 2014. Does the Harm Principle Justify Criminal Drug Statutes Against Drug Use?, The Hilltop Review 7(1).
131. MacCoun, Robert. & Reuter, Peter. 2001. Drug War Heresies : Learning from Other Vices, Times, and Places, X. Cambridge University Press.
132. Mackinem, Mitchell & Higgins, Paul. 2008. Drug Court: Constructing the Moral Identity of Drug Offender. Charles C Thomas Pub Ltd.
133. Maeder, Evelyn. & Yamamoto, Susan. 2017. Attributions in the Courtroom: The Influence of Race, Incentive, and Witness Type on Jurors’ Perceptions of Secondary Confessions, Psychology, Crime & Law. 23(4):361-375.
134. Maolloch, Margaret. 2007. Changing focus: ‘drug-related crime’ and the criminological imagination. Pp. 116-135 in Expanding the Criminological Imagination , edited by Alana Barton, Karen Corteen, David Scott, Dave Whyte.
135. Marlatt, Gordon. 1996. Harm reduction: Come as you are, Addictive Behaviors 21(6):779-88.
136. Marlatt, Gordon. 1998. Harm Reduction: Pragmatic Strategies For Managing High Risk Behaviors. New York, Guilford Press.
137. Marlatt, Gordon., Larimer, Mary., Witkiewitz, Katie(ed). 2012. Harm Reduction: Pragmatic Strategies For Managing High Risk Behaviors. New York, Guilford Press.
138. Marlowe, Douglas. 2021. Drug Courts: The Good, the Bad, and the Misunderstood, in Handbook of Issues. Pp. 637-658 in Criminal Justice Reform in the United States, edited by Elizabeth Jeglic & Cynthia Calkins.
139. Marlowe, Douglas., Merikle Elizabeth., Kirby, Kimberly., Festinger, David., McLellan, Thomas. 2001. Multidimensional assessment of perceived treatment-entry pressures among substance abusers. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors 15(2): 97–108.
140. Martin, Michael., Dorken, Shannon., Wamboldt, Ashley., Wootten, Sarah. Stopping the Revolving Door: A Meta-Analysis on the Effectiveness of Interventions for Criminally Involved Individuals With Major Mental Disorders. 2012. Law and Human Behavior 36(1): 1-12.
141. Martino, Giuseppe. 2022. Revolving Door: Features, Readmissions, and Relapse in Addiction. Pp.353-364 in Handbook of Substance Misuse and Addictions: From Biology to Public Health, edited by Vinood Patel & Victor Preedy. Springer, Cham.
142. Matthews, Steve., Dwyer, Robyn., and Snoek., Anke. 2017. Stigma and Self-Stigma in Addictions. Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 14:275-286.
143. McGeer, Victoria. 2018. Scaffolding agency: A proleptic account of the reactive attitudes. European Journal of Philosophy 27(2):301-323.
144. McKay, James., Franklin, Teresa., Patapis, Nicholas., Lynch, Kevin. 2006. Conceptual, methodological, and analytical issues in the study of relapse. Clinical Psychology Review 26:109-127.
145. Measham, Fiona. 2019. Drug safety testing, disposals and dealing in an English field: Exploring the operational and behavioural outcomes of the UK’s first onsite ‘drug checking’ service, International Journal of Drug Policy 67:102-107.
146. Melemis, Steven. 2015. Relapse Prevention and the Five Rules of Recovery. Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, 88(3):325-332.
147. Mill, John. 1861. Utilitarianism.
148. Mill, John. 2003. On Liberty. Pp.69-417 in On Liberty: John Stuart Mill, edited by David Bromwich & George Kateb. Binghamton: Bail-Ballou Press.
149. Miller, Joann,. Johnson, Donald. Problem Solving Courts: A Measure of Justice.
150. Moallefa, Soroush., Hayashia, Kanna. 2021. The effectiveness of drug-related Good Samaritan laws: A review of the literature, International Journal of Drug Policy 90:102773.
151. Moeller, Kim. 2017. Drug Market Criminology: Combining Economic and Criminological Research on Illicit Drug Markets, International Criminal Justice Review 28(3):191-193.
152. Morse, Stephen. 2013. A Good Enough Reason: Addiction, Agency and Criminal Responsibility. Inquiry 56(5):490-518.
153. National Association of Drug Court Professionals. 1997. Defining Drug Courts: The Key Components, ed. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Justice Assistance.
154. New Zealand Law Commission, Controlling and Regulating Drugs: A Review of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1975. Wellington: New Zealand Law Commission (2011).
155. Nolan, James. 1997. The Therapeutic State: Justifying Government Century’s End. NYU Press.
156. Nolan, James. 2001. Reinventing Justice: The American Drug Court Movement. Princeton University Press.
157. Nolan, James. 2003. Redefining Criminal Courts: Problem Solving and the Meaning of Justice, The American Criminal Law Review 40(4):1541-1565.
158. Nutt, David., King, Leslie., Phillips, Lawrence. 2010. Drug harm in the UK: a multicriteria decision anaylsis, The Lancet 36, 376(9752): 1558-1565.
159. O’ Malley, Pat. 1992. Risk, power and crime prevention, Economy and Society 21(3):252-275.
160. O'Hare, Pat. 2007. Merseyside, the first harm reduction conferences, and the early history of harm reduction, International Journal of Drug Policy 18(2):141-4.
161. O'Reilly, Keelin., Kowalski, Michala., Barratt, Monica. Ritter, Alison. 2022. Distinguishing personal use of drugs from drug supply: Approaches and challenges, International Journal of Drug Policy 103653.
162. Pearson, Geoffrey. 1992. Drugs and Criminal Justice: A harm reduction of Drug-Related Harm. Pp.15-29 in The Reduction of Drug-Related Harm, edited by E. C. Buning, E. Drucker, A. Matthews, R. Newcombe, P. A. O'Haren.
163. Pickard, Hanna. 2017. Responsibility without Blame for Addiction, Neuroethics 10:169-180.
164. Pickard, Hanna. 2021. Addiction and the self, Noûs 55(4):737-761.
165. Pickard, Hanna. 2022. Is addiction a brain disease? A plea for agnosticism and heterogeneity. Psychopharmacology 393:993-1007.
166. Pikcard, Hanna. 2012. The Purpose in Chronic Addiction, AJOB Neurosci 3(2):40-49.
167. Porter, Lindsey. 2020. Harm Reduction and Moral Desert in the Context of Drug Policy, Health Care Analysis 28(4):362-371.
168. Potter, Garfield. 2009. Exploring retail-level drug distribution: social supply, "real" dealers and the user/dealer interface. In Old and new policies, theories, research methods and drug users across Europe, edited by Zsolt Demetrovics, Jane Fountain, & Ludwig Kraus. PABST Science Publishers.
169. Pratt, Travis. & Turanovic, Jillian. 2019. A Criminological Fly in the Ointment: Specialty Courts and the Generality of Deviance, Victims & Offenders 14(3):375–386.
170. Rawls, John. 1971. A Theory of Justice.
171. Raz, Joseph. 1986. The Morality of Freedom.
172. Ritter, Alison. 2022. Drug Policy. New York: Routeldge.
173. Robinson, Terry. & Berridge, Kent. 2003. Addiction. Annual Review of Psychology 54:25–53.
174. Roe, Gordon. 2005. Harm Reduction as Paradigm: Is Better Than Bad Good Enough? The Origins of Harm Reduction. Critical Public Health 15(3):243-250.
175. Rolls, Stephen. & Measham, Fiona. 2011. Questioning the method and utility of ranking drug harms in drug policy, International Journal of Drug Policy, 22(4), 243-246 (2011).
176. Ronner, Amy. 2002. Songs of Validation, voice, and Voluntary Participation: Therapeutic Jurisprudence, Miranda and Juveniles, University of Cininnati Law Review 71(1):89-114.
177. Rose, Nikolas. 2007. Beyond Medicalizations, Lancet 700-702.
178. Rottman, David. 2000. Does effective therapeutic jurisprudence require specialized courts (and do specialized courts imply specialist judge) ?, Court Review 37(2):22-27.
179. Schneider, Kristin., Park, Ju Nyeong., Allen, Sean., Weir, Brain., Sherman, Susan. 2020. Knowledge of Good Samaritan Laws and Beliefs About Arrests Among Persons Who Inject Drugs a Year After Policy Change in Baltimore, Maryland, Public Health Report 135(3):393-400.
180. Seddon, Toby. 2000. Explaining the Drug-Crime Link: Theoretical, Policy and Research Issues, Journal of Social Policy 29(1):95-107.
181. Seddon, Toby. 2007. Coerced drug treatment in the criminal justice system: conceptual, ethical and criminological issues. Criminology & Criminal Justice 7(3): 269-286.
182. Seear, Kate. 2020. Law, Drugs and the Making of Addiction Just Habits.
183. Seear, Kate. 2023. Making addicts: critical reflections on agency and responsibility from lawyers and decision makers, Psychiatr Psychol Law. 30(1): 33-50.
184. Sentencing Council of UK. 2012. Drug Offences Definitive Guideline.
185. Sentencing Council of UK. 2021. Drug Offences Definitive Guideline Revisions 2021.
186. Sevigny, Eric., Fuleihan, Brian., Ferdik Frank. 2013. Do drug courts reduce the use of incarceration?: A meta-analysis, Journal of Criminal Justice 41(6):416-425.
187. Skewes, Monica, & Gonzalez, Vivian. 2013. The Biopsychosocial Model of Addiction. Pp.61-70 in Principles of Addiction: Comprehensive Addictive Behaviors and Disorders, edited by Peter Miller. New York: Academic Press.
188. Slater, Maria. 2018. Is Powell Still Valid? The supreme court’s changing stance on cruel and unusual punishment. Virginia Law Review 104(3):547-587.
189. Slobogin, Christopher. 1995. Therapeutic jurisprudence: Five dilemmas to ponder. Psychology. Public Policy, and Law 1(1):193–219.
190. Small, Dan. 2012. Canada’s highest court unchains injection drug users; implications for harm reduction as standard of healthcare, Harm Reduction Journal 9(34):2-3.
191. Stevens, Alex., Berto, Daniele., Frick, Ulrich., Hunt, Neil., Kerschl, Viktoria., McSweeney, Tim., Oeuvray, Kerrie., Puppo, Irene. Maria, Alberto., Schaaf, Susanne., Trinkl, Barbara., Uchtenhagen, Ambros., Werdenich, Wolfgang. 2006. The Relationship between Legal Status, Perceived Pressure and Motivation in Treatment for Drug Dependence: Results from a European Study of Quasi-Compulsory Treatment. European Addiction Research 12:197-209.
192. Stevens, Alex., Hughes, Caitlin., Hulme, Shann., Cassidy, Rebecca. 2019. Depenalization, diversion and decriminalization: A realist review and programme theory of alternatives to criminalization for simple drug possession, European Journal of Criminology 19(1):29-54.
193. Stobbs, Nigel. 2017. Therapeutic Jurisprudence and due process: consistent in principle and in practice. Journal of Judicial Administration 26(4):248-264.
194. Stobbs, Nigel. 2019. Therapeutic Jurisprudence as Theoretical and Applied Research. Pp.29-58 in Therapeutic jurisprudence Methodology and Practice, edited by Nigel Stobbs, Lorana Bartels and Michel Vols.
195. Stobbs, Nigel., Bartels, Lorana and Vols, Michel. 2019. The Methodology and Practice of Therapeutic Jurisprudence. Carolina Academic Press.
196. Strike, Carol., Millson, Margaret., Hopins, Shaun., Smith, Christopher. 2013. What is low threshold methadone maintenance treatment?, International Journal of Drug Policy 24:34-40.
197. Strike, Carol., Watso, Tara., Lavigne, Paul., Hopkins, Shaun., Shore, Ron. Young, Don., Leonard, Lynne., Millson, Peggy. 2011. Guidelines for better harm reduction: Evaluating implementation of best practice recommendations for needle and syringe programs (NSPs), International Journal of Drug Policy 22:34-40.
198. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). 2012. SAMHSA’s working definition of Recovery, https://store.samhsa.gov/sites/default/files/pep12-recdef.pdf (last visited: Dec. 30, 2024).
199. Sussman, Steve. & Sussman, Alan. 2011. Considering the Definition of Addiction, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 8(10): 4025-4038.
200. Swanner, Jessica., Beike, Denise., Cole, Alexander. 2010. Snitching, Lies and Computer Crashes: An Experimental Investigation of Secondary Confessions, 34 Law and Human Behavior 34(1):53-65.
201. Tayabji, Jaclyn. 2021. Rehabilitation Under the Rehabilitation Act: The Case for Medication-Assisted Treatment in Federal Correctional Facilities, Boston University Law Review 101:79-124.
202. The Police Foundation. 2000. Drugs and the law: a report of the independent inquiry into the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
203. Thomson, Nicholas. 2013. Harm reduction history, response, and current trends in Asia, Journal of Food and Drug Analysis 21(4):113-116.
204. Tiger, Rebecca. 2013. Judging Addicts: Drug Courts and Coercion in the Justice System.
205. Tombs, Steve. 2018. For pragmatism and politics: Crime, social harm and zemiology. Pp.11-31 in Zemiology: Reconnecting Crime and Social Harm, edited by Avi Boukli & Justin Kotzé.
206. Uchtenhagen, Ambros. 2011. Heroin maintenance treatment: From idea to research to practice, Drug and Alcohol Review 30(2):130-137.
207. United Nations (UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination). 2018. The UN System Common Position on drug policy.
208. Valverde, Mariana. 1998. Diseases of the Will: Alcohol and the Dilemmas of Freedom, Cambridge University Press.
209. Volkow, Nora., Fowler, Joanna., Wang, Gene-Jack., Swanson, James., & Telang, Frank. 2007. Dopamine in drug abuse and addiction: Results of imaging studies and treatment implications. Archives of Neurology 64(11):1575–1579.
210. Volkow, Nora., Fowler, Joanna., Wang, Gene-Jack., Telang, Frank., Logan, Jean., Jayne, Millard., et al. (2010). Cognitive control of drug craving inhibits brain reward regions in cocaine abusers. NeuroImage 49(3):2536–2543.
211. Volkow, Nora., Koob, Geroge., McLellian, Thomas. 2016. Neurobiologic Advances from Brain Disease Model of Addiction. The New England Journal of Medicine 374(4):363-371.
212. Wakeman, Sarah. & Rich, Josiah. 2017. Barriers to Medications for Addiction Treatment: How Stigma Kills. Substance Use & Misuse 53(2):330-333.
213. Weatherburn, Don. 2009. Dilemmas in harm minimization. Addiction 104(3), 335-339.
214. Werb, Dan., Kamarulzaman, Adeeba., Meacham, Meredith., Rafful, Claudia., Fischer, Benedikt., Strathdee, Stathdee., Wood, Even. 2016. The effectiveness of compulsory drug treatment: A systematic review. International Journal of Drug Policy. 28:1-9.
215. William, Glanville. 1955. The Definition of Crime. Current Legal Problems 8(1): 107-130.
216. Wilson, James. 2011. Why It’s Time to Stop Worrying About Paternalism in Public Health Policy, Public Health Ethics 4(3):269-279.
217. Winick, Bruce., Wexler, David. 2002. Drug Treatment Court: Therapeutic Jurisprudence Applied, Touro Law Review 18(6):479-485.
218. Wodak, Alex., Cooney, Annie. 2005. Effectiveness of sterile needle and syringe programmes, International Journal of Drug Policy 16:39-41.
219. Woods, Jordan. 2015. Decriminalization, Police Authority, and Routine Traffic Stops, UCLA Law Review 62:672-759.
220. Zachary Smith (Plaintiff) v. Joseph Fitzpatrick, Commissioner of Maine Department of Corrections; and Shawn D. Gillen, Chief Deputy and Acting Aroostook County Sheriff (Defendants) 18-CV-00352-NT, https://www.aclumaine.org/sites/default/files/smith_v._fitzpatrick_complaint.pdf (last visited: Dec. 30, 2024)
221. Zampini, Giulia. 2018. Evidence and morality in harm-reduction debates: can we use value-neutral arguments to achieve value-driven goals?, Humanities & Social Sciences Communications 4(62):1-10.
中文部分
1. Adam Benforado、堯嘉寧譯（2016），不公平的審判：心理學與神經科學告訴你，為何司法判決還是這麼不公平，臉譜出版。
2. Franz Kafka著、萬壹遵譯（2024），在律法之前，收於：變形記及其他：卡夫卡中短篇小說選，頁30-32，堡壘文化。
3. Maia Szalavitz著、鄭谷苑譯（2018），成癮與大腦：重度毒癮者的自白及成癮行為的形成和治療，遠流出版。
4. 王立柔（2018），「三人成虎」誣陷別人就能減刑？從蕭明岳案看證據法則角力戰，報導者。
5. 王作仁（2017），毒品法庭跨領域防治 美國這樣做，蘋果日報。
6. 王皇玉（2004），論施用毒品行為之犯罪化，國立臺灣大學法學論叢，第33卷第6期，頁39-76。
7. 王皇玉（2005），論販賣毒品罪，政大法學評論，第84期，頁225-275。
8. 王皇玉（2010），台灣毒品政策與立法之回顧與評析，月旦法學雜誌，180期，頁80-96。
9. 王皇玉（2016），刑法總則，新學林出版。
10. 民間司法改革基金會（2024），法務部立法草率 修法後仍有違憲疑慮——針對法務部《毒危條例》草案之意見，https://jrf.org.tw/articles/2532（最後瀏覽日期：2024/12/30）。
11. 民間司法改革基金會（2024），情輕法重個案未解決，毒品防治政策待改革－就憲法法庭「販賣第一級毒品案」判決之聲明，https://jrf.org.tw/articles/2532（最後瀏覽日期：2024/12/30）
12. 立法院（1995），立法院公報第84卷第65期。
13. 立法院（2015），立法院公報第98卷第26期。
14. 立法院（2017），第9屆第3會期第13次會議議案關係文書院總字308號，委員提案第20750號。
15. 朱學恒（2016），這樣的修法哪叫向毒品宣戰？，ETtoday新聞雲。
16. 自由時報（2016），毒品醫療前置化引論戰 台大教授提「毒品法庭」。
17. 何賴傑（2002），檢察官不起訴職權修法之總檢討－第一部分：緩起訴處分，法學講座，頁1-26。
18. 吳景欽（2016），是罪犯、病犯、還是病患？。
19. 吳耀宗（2010），多次施用毒品之競合問題，軍法集刊，第56卷第1期，頁163-185。
20. 呂苡榕（2022），我不是藥頭，鏡週刊。
21. 周漾沂（2024），法概念、法益與刑事立法，月旦法學雜誌，第348期，頁6-18。
22. 林文源（2015），導讀－掙脫怪異知識空間：從醫療化理論到在地處境，收於：許甘霖等譯，社會醫療化：論人類境況如何轉為可治之症，頁18-72。
23. 林立青（2017），做工的人，寶瓶文化。
24. 林俊儒（2018），毒品法庭的批判性考察，國立政治大學法律學系碩士班碩士論文。
25. 林俊儒（2018），簡評2018年法務部《毒品危害防制條例》草案，上報。
26. 林俊儒（2019），毒品法庭的制度內涵與爭議檢討，犯罪與刑事司法研究，第31期，頁35-70。
27. 林俊儒（2020），減刑規定與罪刑相當原則：從釋字第790號反思重刑化的毒品政策，月旦醫事法報告，45期，頁17-28。
28. 林俊儒（2022），再犯認定、處遇等同性與機關分工－從大法庭裁定觀察毒品施用者處遇的法理發展與運作情形，法律扶助與社會，8期，頁197-230。
29. 林俊儒（2023），「供出毒品來源」供述證據補強法則之檢證－以販賣毒品既遂案件為中心，法律扶助與社會，11期，頁1-38。
30. 林俊儒（2024），刑事司法對於藥物輔助處遇的限制－美國身心障礙者法案如何促進法律與文化變遷，月旦醫事法報告，95期，頁56-67。
31. 林俊儒（2024），施用毒品者處遇的病犯體制：大法庭與刑事政策相互形塑的啟示與檢討，臺大法學論叢，53卷，特刊，頁1021-1076。
32. 林俊儒（2024），施用毒品者處遇裁量的正當程序初探，月旦律評，25期，頁128-135。
33. 林俊儒主編（2023），用藥少年：寫給老師的校園法規與輔導實務，五南出版。
34. 林琬珊（2019），持有概念與持有毒品罪－從最高法院 104 年度臺非字第 199 號判決談起，政大法學評論，第158期，頁161-228。
35. 林達（2017），創建毒品法庭 升級作業系統，蘋果日報。
36. 林達（2017），新設毒品法庭翻轉毒品政策，蘋果日報。
37. 林達（2019），毒品危害防制之司法資源整合：以多元處遇及毒品法庭為中心 從毒品多元處遇談毒品法庭－兼談美國毒品法庭，收於：台灣法學會主編，台灣法學新課題（十四），頁151-260。
38. 林達（2023），論毒品初犯觀察勒戒之廢止與重建，最高檢察論壇，創刊號，頁222-232。
39. 林鈺雄（2018），新刑法總則，元照出版。
40. 法務部（2019），毒品防制修法剛柔並濟，絕非輕縱（新聞稿），法務部網站。
41. 法務部（2022），矯正機關受刑人概況分析。
42. 法務部（2023），長刑期受刑人統計分析。
43. 法務部（2024），112年法務統計年報。
44. 法務部（2024），預告修正「毒品危害防制條例」第十七條之一（公告）。
45. 柯耀程（2014），刑法總則，三民書局。
46. 紀致光（2014），緩起訴處分戒癮治療之回顧與展望，犯罪學期刊，17卷，2期，頁193-212。
47. 范耕維（2020），罪刑相當原則之理論初探－以釋字第775號解釋為楔子，月旦法學雜誌，301期，頁131-148。
48. 范耕維（2022），建構量刑階段中罪刑相當原則的第一哩路－自應報觀點形塑刑罰量定之理論嘗試，中研院法學期刊，第30 期，頁79-170。
49. 唐心北（2009），運用緩起訴處分制度，有效提升美沙冬替代療法之成效，管制藥品簡訊，第40期，頁3-5。
50. 栗原純，徐國章譯（2007），日本帝國主義與鴉片：台灣總督府的鴉片政策。台北市：台大出版中心出版。
51. 常子薇（2022），施用藥物刑事政策及處遇制度之省思－以葡萄牙、哥倫比亞、智利、巴西及烏拉圭之實踐經驗為例，國立臺灣大學法律學院碩士論文。
52. 張天一（2010），論販賣毒品罪在立法及適用上之問題，中原財經法學，第24期，頁165-205（2010年）
53. 張天一（2024），販賣毒品罪之著手認定－兼評最高法院 109 年度台上大字第 4861 號裁定，台灣法律人，第32期，頁99-115。
54. 張麗卿（2016），毒品濫用與戒治，月旦法學雜誌，258期，頁116-131。
55. 曹馥年（2023），「向大麻宣戰」戰鼓聲中，大麻合法化能有多少對話的可能？，收於：李雪莉主編，島國毒癮紀事：那些在製販、司法、醫療社區裡的用藥悲劇與重生，頁178-210。
56. 許宏彬（2005），從阿片君子到矯正樣本：阿片吸食者、更生院與杜聰明，科技、醫療與社會，第3期，頁113-174。
57. 許恒達（2011），刑法法益概念的茁生與流變，月旦法學雜誌，197期，頁134-151。
58. 許恒達（2013），論保安處分之強制工作，月旦法學雜誌，214期，頁193-213。
59. 許恒達（2022），罪刑法定原則與犯罪階層體系－刑法論罪方法論芻議，台灣法律人，第15期，頁69-87。
60. 許恒達（2023），刑事制裁與明顯區隔原則，台灣法律人，27期，頁77-103。
61. 許春金、陳玉書、蔡田木（2013），毒品施用者處遇及除罪化可行性之研究，行政院研究發展考核委員會委託研究。
62. 許家馨（2014），應報即復仇？－當代應報理論及其對死刑之意涵初探，中研院法學期刊第15期，頁207-282。
63. 郭適維、陳玉書、林建陽、劉士誠（2022），「繼續施用毒品傾向評估指標」預測效度之研究，矯正期刊，11卷，1期，頁64-111。
64. 陳志輝（2007），競合論之發展在實務實踐的光與影－以集合犯概念為中心，臺灣本土法學雜誌，第101期，頁137-160。
65. 陳玟如（2018），尋找復元的可能－毒品使用者復元資本、復元障礙與復元關係之研究，國立臺灣大學社會科學院社會工作學系博士論文。
66. 陳嘉新（2018），減害政策與「官方」的組成，收於：蔡友月、陳嘉新編，不正常的人？台灣精神醫學與現代性的治理，頁307-345。
67. 游淑真（2017），從旋轉門效應來看精神疾患者的社區照顧服務，社會工作實務與研究學刊，第5期，頁59-98。
68. 黃名琪（2017），這樣做 才有助毒品戒癮治療，蘋果日報。
69. 黃宗旻（2022），販賣未遂－最高法院109年度台上大字第4861號刑事裁定，月旦裁判時報，第123期，頁55-61。
70. 黃宗旻（2023），毒品販賣意圖之認定－最高法院 111 年度台上字第 254 號刑事判決，月旦裁判時報，第137期，頁59-67。
71. 黃俊能、賴擁連（2018），毒品犯再犯暴力犯罪之危險因子與社區處遇對策，刑事政策與犯罪研究論文集，21集，頁153-182。
72. 黃昭元（2023），憲法法庭112年憲判字第13號判決不同意見書，頁3。
73. 黃逸薰（2023），從犯人到病人，緩護療十五年改革還缺什麼？，收於：李雪莉主編，島國毒癮紀事：那些在製販、司法、醫療社區裡的用藥悲劇與重生，頁340-356。
74. 黃鼎軒（2019），刑事程序中轉向措施之研究－以檢察官裁量權之實踐為中心，元照出版。
75. 黃榮堅（1998），刑罰的極限，元照出版。
76. 楊士隆、李宗憲（2020），毒癮者的處遇模式，收於：楊士隆、李思賢主編，藥物濫用、毒品與防治（第三版），頁387-415。
77. 詹森林（2020），釋字第790號解釋部分不同意見書。
78. 監察院（1999），監察院公報第2244期。
79. 監察院（2019），108司調字第49號。
80. 管婺媛（2017），提設立毒品法庭 立委：有效打擊毒品犯罪，聯合報。
81. 臺灣高等檢察署（2021），2020年國內毒品情勢快速分析年報。
82. 臺灣高等檢察署（2024），2023年國內毒品情勢快速分析年報。
83. 劉憲錡，筆名偷筆（2023），聖水，自由副刊：林榮三文學獎・短篇小說三獎。
84. 歐陽正宇（2020），偵查中就初犯施用毒品罪被告於附命緩起訴前另涉施用犯行之處理模式分析－以實務見解為中心（一），法務通訊，第3032期，頁3-6。
85. 蔡佩真（2019），兒女傷、父母痛：K他命成癮者父母的傷痛經驗與搶救行動，臺大社會工作學刊，39期，頁1-55。
86. 衛生福利部（2024），113年度「美沙冬替代治療服務可近性補助計畫」說明書。
87. 衛生福利部（2024），113年度「藥癮治療費用補助方案」說明書。
88. 鄭凱寶、黃宣瑄（2023），第二級毒品施用者之司法戒治成本比較研究──以臺灣臺北地方檢察署及法務部矯正署新店戒治所為例，刑事政策與犯罪防治研究專刊，第34期，頁147-190。
89. 蕭白雪（2017），設毒品法庭…蔡英文：該做 司法院長：再研究，聯合報。
90. 蕭彣卉（2007），病人與犯人：台灣百年來吸毒者的軌跡，台灣大學法律學研究所碩士論文。
91. 蕭其蓁、雷文玫、謝丹雯、陳娟瑜（2024），社區女性非法藥物使用者童年逆境經歷與不良親密關係之相關性探討，台灣公共衛生雜誌，43卷，2期，頁169-182。
92. 賴佩璇（2017），司改國是會議 兩派論戰是否設「毒品法庭」，聯合報。
93. 錢永祥（2014），把道德關懷帶進政治生活，收於：錢永祥著，動情的理性，頁1-21（2014年）。
94. 錢建榮（2012），「買」或「賣」搞不清楚？！（上）－最高法院 25 年非字第 123 號等 4 則販毒判例之檢討，月旦法學雜誌，第210期，頁65-75。
95. 謝如媛（2022），禁止強制工作對國家刑罰權運作界限的意義與反思，台灣法律人，11期，頁42-63。
96. 謝如媛（2025），刑事政策研究成果回顧，收於：詹鎮榮、劉靜怡、邱文聰主編，法律學研究成果回顧與社會影響性2001-2020（下），頁185-216。
97. 謝煜偉（2005），寬嚴並進刑事政策之省思，月旦法學雜誌，126期，頁131-157。
98. 謝煜偉（2014），重新檢視死刑的應報意義，中研院法學期刊，第15期，頁139-206。
99. 謝煜偉（2015），寬容社會的曙光？—從市民刑法的例外、犯罪事後處理機能、社會責任於個人責任的反饋回應三篇評論文，中研院法學期刊，第17期，頁369-402。
100. 謝煜偉（2020），罪刑相當原則與情節輕微條款，月旦法學教室，頁26-31。
101. 謝煜偉（2022），2021年刑事立法與實務發展回顧：以治安與治療為名，臺大法學論叢，第51卷特刊，頁1223-1255。
102. 鍾麗華、項程鎮（2016），蔡：不涉販毒的成癮者 應視為病人，自由時報。
103. 顏榕（2023），偵查中之轉向政策—以緩起訴制度為中心，臺北大學法學論叢，126期，頁259-329。
104. 顧以謙、許家毓、陳湘渝、吳永達（2021），第一級毒品施用之具體求刑與法院裁判之差異分析，藥物濫用與防治，6 卷 4 期，頁 89-111。 |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
法律學系
109651507 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109651507 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [法律學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 150701.pdf | 22772Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
