日治時期臺灣監獄制度之研究（1895-1945）

Abstract

現今一般人民對「監獄」的理解，是指犯罪者經司法審判後，接受懲處和矯正、感化的執行場所。這個看似簡單的概念，對於一百多年前的台灣人民而言，卻是不同於傳統中國施行「笞、杖、徒、流、死」的刑罰方式，而是一種來自西方的現代性刑罰。1895年日本治台後，引進西方式監獄制度，促使台灣的刑罰方式，由傳統邁向現代。 日治台灣監獄法令，主要歷經1895年「台灣監獄令」、1899年「台灣監獄則」、1908年「台灣監獄令」三次的修正。台灣監獄法令頒布內容，大多依用日本內地監獄法規定，可視為內地法延長的一部分。不過台灣監獄法令裡，也有因地制宜的特別規定，顯示台灣監獄體系並非由內地直轄，而是隨台灣自身需求來應變。台灣總督府擁有立法權，不僅在台灣監獄法令裡制定特別規定，更直接以特別立法，制定「犯罪即決例」、「罰金及笞刑處分例」、「台灣浮浪者取締規則」，作為取代監獄制度的便宜方式。這些特別立法影響台灣監獄制度的正常運作，也造成台灣人民無法辨識「監獄」、「留置場」、「浮浪者收容所」三個場所的差異性。 台灣監獄的組織，分為監督監獄運作的中央機關，和實際管理監獄的地方監獄。1900年以後，監獄事務由台灣總督府法務課直轄。全台各地監獄的分布，分別為台北、台中、台南三大監獄，和宜蘭、新竹、嘉義、高雄、花蓮港支所。台灣監獄組織的運作，也透過「台灣總督府監獄官制」頒布，確立典獄、典獄補、看守長、通譯、監獄醫、教誨師等監獄執行人員的職務，確保監獄順利運作。這些監管台灣監獄的人員，一部分來自「台灣總督府警察官及司獄官練習所」的培養。但因台灣監獄人員培訓課程，附屬於警察學校裡，所以有部分人員會選擇到日本內地的「監獄官練習所」進修。 現代型監獄對受刑者的管理方式，逐漸從「懲罰」轉變為「教育」為主。當監獄管理方式改變時，代表「監獄」執行的重點，也從嚴懲受刑者，變成協助其改過自新，再次回歸社會。日本內地於昭和年間將「教育刑」的概念，落實在「行刑累進處遇令」、「假釋放審查規程」上。然而，台灣總督府卻未施行這些法令，使得台灣監獄著重於懲罰，更甚於教育的功能。台灣與日本內地監獄受刑者的差別待遇，顯示日治台灣監獄制度在現代性的樣貌下，仍存在殖民統治的不平等待遇。The current public understanding of "prison" means the executive place where convicted criminals receive punishment, correction and reformation. This seeming simple concept, for Taiwanese of 100 years ago, is a modern western penalty rather than the traditional Chinese penalty of “whipping, stick beating, exile, and death." After Japanese occupation started in 1895, it brought western prison system and set up Taiwanese penalties from traditional ways to modern ones.

Taiwanese prison order during Japanese occupation period was reformed via "Taiwanese Prison Order"in 1895, "Taiwanese Prison Regulation" in 1899 and "Taiwanese Prison Rule” in 1908. Most of Taiwanese prison orders' content follows Japanese prison regulations, as a partial extension of Japanese common law. However, there are regulations suiting local circumstances in Taiwanese prison order so to demonstrate that Taiwanese prison system is not directly under the Japanese control, but varies according to its needs. The Governor Palace in Taiwan entitling of legislation institutes special regulations in Taiwanese prison order and legislates special law orders such as "Immediate Sentence for Criminals," "Penalty and Whipping Example" and "Furosha Prohibition Rules" as the more convenient ways to replace prison system. These special law orders not only influence Taiwanese prison system’s operation, but also cause Taiwanese people to have difficulty distinguishing the difference among "Prison," "Detention Center" and "Furosha Rehabilitation."

Taiwanese prison system is divided into the central institutions which supervise the prison operation and the actual prison-superintending local prisons. Since 1900, the prison affair was directly under the superintendence of the Governor Palace in Taiwan's Legal Affairs Section. The prison distributions in Taiwan consist of three major prisons of Taipei, Taichung and Tainan, and subdivisions of Yilan, Hsinchu, Chiayi, Kaohsiung and Hualien Harbor. The operation of Taiwanese prison systems is also via the Governor Palace in Taiwan

The issue of "Prison Officials of the Governor Palace in Taiwan" establishes the official duties of warden, chef guarder, interpreter, prison doctor and moral instructor in order to ensure smooth prison operation. A part of these officials comes from the cultivation of “Police Officer-Training School of the Governor Palace in Taiwan." Nevertheless, due to the training course of Taiwanese police officials is subordinated to the police school, some officials would choose to study at the police officer-training school in Japan.

The modern prison's management styles toward prisoners gradually transform the core from "punishment" to "education." With the change of prison management styles, the emphasis of "prison" execution shifts from imposing panality on those prisoners to assisting them to reform themselves and return to society. During the Shouwa period in Japan, the concept of "educational panality” was implemented to “Progressive Treatment of the Punishment System” and "Parole Investigation Regulation.” However, the Governor Palace in Taiwan does not practice these law orders; as a result, Taiwanese prison emphasizes the penalty side rather than the educational function. The different treatment toward prisoners in Taiwan and Japan suggests that even under the modern facade of Taiwanese prison system, the unequal treatment under colonial rule still exists.