College of Law, National Taiwan University
SEMINAR ON INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
國際人道法案例專題討論

[Semester Theme]
Transitional Justice
[學期主題]
轉型正義

Class Number: A21 U2350
Class Schedule: Tuesday 3:30pm-5:20pm（法研5）
Office Hour: Thursday 1pm-3pm
Instructor: Wen-Chen Chang

授課教師：張文貞
台大法律學院 羅斯福路4段1號
萬才館2619室
Tel: 33668948
Email: wenchenchang@ntu.edu.tw

Teaching Assistant:
李怡俐Yi-Li Lee (d97a21005@ntu.edu.tw)

Fall 2011
一、課程說明
國際人道法的發展與十九世紀的戰爭法有極密切的關係。因為歐洲民族國家間的戰爭與兩次世界大戰，國際社群開始思考戰爭時期的人道問題與國家及相關人員對戰爭所應該負起的相應責任。在第二次世界大戰之後，因著國際人權法與國際人道法發展上的成熟，更出現了兩大法律系統間的匯流與補充現象。九Ｏ年代末期，新興民主國家紛紛建立，國際人道法更因著轉型正義的討論受到更多的重視，而本學期不同於過往的課程，將從轉型正義的議題切入討論國際人道法與國家轉型過程中所面對的各種難題。
轉型正義是國家在政權轉移時所面對的普遍難題，此難題也同時成為學術界的討論焦點。轉型正義和一般正義間的區別點為何？是對誰的正義？其目的為何？為什麼國家在民主轉型的過程中又必須要面對轉型正義的問題？此外，又有多少種機制可以提供國家面對轉型正義的難題？面對轉型正義的課題，不論是內國或是國際社會都發展出了不同的機制來回應轉型正義的難題。例如二次大戰後的紐倫堡大審與東京大審被用來處理當時戰敗國德國與日本的戰爭責任與人權侵害的問題。同時，為了回應戰爭所帶來的巨大災害，國際社會更陸續地討論出一套國際人道法來解決國際上與國家間的戰爭的問題。而此討論也帶動了日後國際刑事法與國際刑事法院的成立。除了國際的刑事審判程序，有些內國也採取刑事審判的機制來處理內國的轉型正義與人權侵害議題。除了刑事審判的機制外，有些國家也採取了真相調查委員會、制定大赦法、金錢補償或是採取一系列的行政制度改革等機制來回應轉型正義的問題。
　　在這些機制與規範被逐一建立與實踐後，我們要問的是這些機制的各自特點是什麼？其各自有何不同的優點和限制？例如國際人道法乃至於國際刑事法所發展出的規範與原則，是否改變了轉型正義的討論。這些機制是否能回應個別國家所面對的問題？這些機制與實踐又為轉型正義帶來何種反省與思考？這些問題都是本堂課程欲深入探討的問題。

二、課程教材
#每周必讀教材
@每週參考教材

三、課程大綱與進度
Week 1 9/13
課程介紹

Week 2 9/20
主題一：什麼是轉型正義與其面臨的難題

#Teitel, Ruti G. "Transitional Justice Genealogy." Harvard Human Rights Journal, 69-94 (2003).
@Boraine, Alexander L., “Transitional Justice: A Holistic Interpretation”, Journal of International Affairs 60:1, (2006).
# Paige Arthur, How “Transitions” Reshaped Human Rights: A Conceptual History of Transitional Justice, 31 (2) Human Rights Quarterly, 321-367.
@Neil J. Kritz, “The Dilemmas of Transitional Justice,” in Transitional Justice, Vol. III (Washington: United States Institute for Peace Press, 1995) xxi-xxxii.

Week 3 9/27
主題二：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅰ)刑事審判
國際人道法與國際特別刑事法庭

#Four Geneva Conventions and their two Protocols
#Common Article 3
#International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda http://www.unictr.org/
#Prosecuotr v. Akayesu, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (1998)（缺必讀頁數）
#International Criminal Tribunal for the Formal Yugoslavia
#Prosecutor v. Tadic, International Criminal Tribunal for the Formal Yugoslavia (1997).（缺必讀頁數）

Week 4 10/4
主題二：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅰ)刑事審判
塞拉利昂特別法庭
(Special Court for Sierra Leone)
柬埔寨特別刑事法庭
(Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia)
東帝汶特別刑法庭
(Special Panels for Serious Crimes in East Timor)

# Suzanne Katzenstein, Hybrid Tribunals: Searching for Justice in East Timor, Harvard Human Rights Journal , Vol. 16, 245-278(2003).
# Ford, Stuart, Crimes against Humanity at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia: Is a Connection with Armed Conflict Required, 24 UCLA Pac. Basin L.J. 125 (2006-2007).
# Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone
# Henry J. Steiner, Philip Alston &Ryan Goodman, International Human Rights in Context: Law, Politics, Moral, 1310-1318 (2009).

Week 5 10/11
主題二：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅰ)刑事審判
羅馬國際刑事規約與國際刑事法院

#The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (United Nations, 1998). Available at http://untreaty.un.org/cod/icc/statute/romefra.htm
#SCHABAS WILLIAM, AN INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT,1-16, 62-156 (2011).
@Kirsch, Philippe. “The International Criminal Court: Current Issues and Perspectives.” Law and Contemporary Problems 64:1, 3-12(2001).

Week 6 10/18
主題二：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅰ)刑事審判
內國刑事審判:以阿根廷與韓國為例

#NINO, CARLOS SANTIAGO, RADICAL EVIL ON TRIAL, 2-104(1996).
#May 18 Incident Non-institution of Prosecution Decision case, (7-2 KCCR 697, 95Hun-Ma221, etc., December 15,1995), in THE FIRST TEN YEARS OF KOREAN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT(The Constitutional Court of Korea ed., 2001)
@ In Sup Han, Kwangju and Beyond: Coping with Past State Atrocities in South Korea, 27 HUM. RTS. Q. 999, 1007-1008.(2005).



Week 7 10/25
主題三：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅱ)真相調查委員會

#Hayner, Priscilla, "Why a Truth Commission?," Unspeakable Truths (2001)
@ Mark Freeman and Priscilla B. Hayner. “Truth-Telling”, in “Reconciliation after Violent Conflict: A Handbook”, eds. David Bloomfield, Teresa Barnes, and Luc Huyse (Stockholm: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, 2003) 122-138.

Week 8 11/1
主題三：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅱ)真相調查委員會
-以南非真相調查委員會為例

#Promotion of National Unity and Reconciliation Act, No 34 of 1995(South Africa)
#Azanian Peoples Organisation (AZAPO) and others v. President of the Republic of South Africa, Constitutional Court, 27 July 1996.
@Van Zyl, Paul. “Dilemmas of Transitional Justice: The Case of South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission.” Journal of International Affairs, 1999. pgs. 647-667.
@Truth and Reconciliation Commission of South Africa Report http://www.info.gov.za/otherdocs/2003/trc/

Week 9 11/8

Professor Manfred Nowak演講。演講主題：Torture: Perspective from UN Special Rapporteur on Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment (中文題目：禁止酷刑的權利－聯合國前調查官的觀點與經驗)

Week10 11/15

校慶停課一次。請同學自行觀賞與轉型正義有關的電影。推薦影片如下
1. 紐倫堡大審(Judgment on Nuremburg, 1961)
2. 辛德勒的名單(Schindler's list, 1993)
3. 盧安達飯店(Hotel Rwanda, 2006)
4. 旅行之歌 (Grbavica, 2006)
5. 竊聽風暴(The Lives of Others, 2007)
6. 華麗的假期(May 18, 2008)
7. 為愛朗讀(The Reader, 2009)
8. 赤色謊言(Red Dust, 2009)
9. 被出賣的台灣(Betrayed Taiwan, 2009)
10. 眼淚(Tears, 2010)

Week 11 11/22

主題四：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅲ) 大赦(特赦)

# Scharf, Michael. “The Amnesty Exception to the Jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.” Cornell International Law Journal. 1999. pgs. 507-527.
# Christina Binder, The Prohibition of Amnesties by Inter-American Court of Human Rights, 39 Denv. J. Int'l L. & Pol'y 239
@Elizabeth B. Ludwin King, Amnesties in a Time of Transition, 41 Geo. Wash. Int'l L. Rev. 577

Week12 11/29
主題五：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅳ)金錢補償

# Roht-Arriaza, Naomi, “Reparations Decisions and Dilemmas,” Hastings International and Comparative Law Review 27 (2003-2004): 157-220.
@United Nations General Assembly. “Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to a Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law.” 21 March 2006. A/RES/60/147

Week13 12/6
主題六：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅴ)行政改革

#De Greiff, Pablo, “Vetting and Transitional Justice,” in Alexander Mayer-Rieckh and Pablo de Greiff, eds., Justice As Prevention: Vetting Public Employees in Transitional Societies (New York: Social Science Research Council, 2007), pp. 522-544.
@Duthie, Roger, “Introduction,” in Alexander Mayer-Rieckh and Pablo de Greiff, eds., Justice As Prevention: Vetting Public Employees in Transitional Societies (New York: Social Science Research Council, 2007), pp. 15-34.


Week 14 12/13
主題六：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅴ)行政改革
以東歐國家實踐為例

#Mark S. Ellis, Purging the Past: The Current State of Lustration Laws in the Former Communist Bloc, 59-AUT Law & Contemp. Probs. 181-193 (1996).
@Tina, Rosenberg, The Haunted Land: Facing Europe’s Ghosts after Communism. 3-121(1996).


Week 15 12/20
主題七：轉型正義的機制選擇(Ⅵ)遺忘過去

#Ackerman, Bruce, The Future of Liberal Revolution, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1994, 69-77.
@Encarnacion, Omar G, Reconciliation after democratization: coping with the past in Spain, 123(3) Political Science Quarterly (2008).


Week 16 12/27
主題八：轉型正義在台灣的實踐與檢討

#228事件處理及補償條例
#財團法人228事件紀念基金會
#戒嚴時期不當叛亂暨匪諜審判案件補償條例
#財團法人戒嚴時期不當叛亂暨匪諜審判案件補償基金會
#Wu, Naiteh., 2005, Transitional without Justice, or Justice without History: Transitional Justice in Taiwan, TAIWAN JOURNAL OF DEMOCRACY 1, (1): 77-102.

Week 17 1/3

修課同學提出期末報告

四、評分方式
本課程將非常重視學生的課堂討論與參與。修課同學必須在每次上課前閱讀指定資料，並參與課程討論。學期成績將以上課參與及報告（50%）以及期末報告（50%）綜合評量核算。