● 中文摘要：

       我國單純施用一、二級毒品者，依據法務部統計，經矯正處遇後再涉案率為74.8%；同時自2008年「毒品危害防制條例」修訂第24條，施用毒品者得以緩起訴處分附命戒癮治療，亦即從觀察勒戒、強制戒治優先於刑罰的轉向處遇，逐漸轉為倚重緩起訴處分附命戒癮治療，此乃藉由刑事司法轉向制度的前門策略，結合衛生醫療體系，在檢察官與觀護人的監督下，配合尿液檢驗與藥物治療、心理治療與社會復健，以達促使毒品犯戒癮並重新復歸於社會之目標。然而一、二級毒品緩起訴案件中，我國在2012與2013年撤銷一、二級毒品緩起訴比例分別為62.9%與57.0%，因此對於如何針對每一位毒品犯不同的醫療需求與再犯罪傾向，需要有系統、客觀的評估工具，提高個別處遇的有效性。本計畫目的是發展我國具信、效度、系統性與客觀性之毒品施用者再犯危險傾向與分流處遇評估工具（中文版RANT®），以作為檢察官、觀護人或其他社區處遇相關人員準確評估與擬訂分流處遇之參考。 本研究共計召開3次專家會議、1次專家諮詢，有15位專家與會，專家背景包括犯罪防治領域教授、檢察官、成癮治療醫師、心理師、社工師、觀護人、縣市毒品危害防治中心承辦人等。專家焦點團體的共識與結論如下： 1. 分流評估的可行性：RANT®可以作為毒品犯的初步評估，雖然內容涉及再犯與醫療需求，但是這些評估向度是做為分流客觀指標，並非醫療專業評估，因此由檢察官或是檢事官進行前端評估相當可行。 2. RANT®信、效度：評估項目皆有過去文獻的支持，為可信且有效的科學實證，能預測再犯風險與醫療需求。 3. 評量結果可以提供檢察官作裁定的參考，檢察官依舊獨立行使職權。搭配檢察官給予緩起訴時有哪些監督與治療方案，建議應予以整合與規劃。 4. 本土化評估：因為RANT®涵蓋再犯危險因子，也包含了醫療上的需求，這些因子有跨文化共通性，加上RANT®計分有其邏輯性，建議暫時不加我國特有題目。 5. 修改相關辦法與規劃我國處遇內容：有需要修訂毒品戒癮治療實施辦法及完成治療認定標準與毒品危害防制條例。現行處遇多著重於司法內容，建議未來處遇可整合精神醫學、心理治療、公共衛生、社區工作等各領域，平衡司法處遇以及社區處遇，並結合各家暴中心、性侵害中心等次系統，統整成為一個完整的處遇結構。 在實際毒品犯個案評量部分，本研究將RANT®工具預試於34位一、二級毒品緩起訴的個案，依據工具評量結果，中文版RANT®已具備下列特性： 1. 易讀性：個案多能直接了解題目之意涵，能快速做出直覺式回答。 2. 便利性：個案平均能在10分鐘內作答完畢，也可以很快完成計分與風險需求評估的判讀。 3. 具有信度：RANT®隔一週再測信度為0.8。 結論與建議：本研究結合專家建議與對個案的預試，發現為了落實對毒品施用者的分流處遇，有需要刪除「毒品危害防制條例」第24條「為附命完成戒癮治療之緩起訴處分」的限制，回歸緩起訴的多元附隨處分。以依據毒品施用者個別的特性及需求，在司法轉向與監督，以及醫療、心理輔導、社會復歸等多元處遇方案的配合下，提供適切的分流處遇，以達到更有效的戒癮與社會復歸的結果。因此，本研究對毒品施用者分流處遇之建議包括： （一）跳脫醫療思維，放寬處遇限制，以達到適合不同類型個案的多元化社區處遇的效果。 （二）鼓勵民間參與，發展多元方案，以適合毒品施用者與各類型犯罪人、更生人的矯治及社會復歸需求。 （三）司法充分授權，簡化認定程序，以避免增加刑事司法體系之負擔，增加檢察官為緩起訴處附隨處分之意願。  

● English Abstract：

     According to Ministry of Justice (Executive Yuan, R.O.C.), the recidivism rate is 74.8% for those who simply used Schedule I and/or Schedule II drugs and then received corrections; meanwhile, Article 24 of Statute for Narcotics Hazard Prevention and Controlwas amended to ‘illicit drug users can receive deferred prosecution with conditionality for demanded/compulsory drugabstention and treatment’ indicating a gradual shift from taking diversion actions, i.e. employing observation & abstention and compulsory abstention prior to the use of penalties, to relying on deferred prosecutions with conditionality for abstention andtreatment in medical settings. By incorporating both the criminal justice system, e.g. adopting its front-door strategy, and the healthcare system, e.g. monitored by prosecutors and probation officers with other measures including urine testing routine, pharmacological treatment, psychotherapy and social rehabilitation, it is hoped to urge drug inmates to quit their using and return to the society. Nonetheless, among all the deferred prosecution cases concerning Schedule I and/or Schedule II drugs in Taiwan, 62.9% and 57.0% were revoked in 2012 and 2013 respectively. Under that circumstance, in order to improve the effectiveness of individual treatment, more systematic and objective assessment tools and/or procedures are required to meet the different medical demands and recidivism of different drug inmates. This study aims to develop reliable, valid, systematic and objective measures to assess the criminogenic/medical risks and triage of illicit drug users, i.e. the Chinese version of Risk and Needs Triage (RANT®), and to serve as reference when accurate evaluation and triage plans are required by prosecutors, probation officers or other community-based treatment personnel. There were three expert meetings and one expert consulting with 15 experts includingprofessors in the field of crime prevention and corrections, prosecutors, psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers, probation officers and case managers from county-and city-level drug abuse prevention centers involved in this study. The consensus reached and the conclusions made by those experts and focus groups are: 1. The feasibility of Triage: RANT®can serve as the preliminary assessment even though its content involves both the drug inmate’s criminogenicand medical demand. Since these assessment criteria are to be considered as objective indicators instead of professional medical evaluations, it is rather workable for either a prosecutor or a prosecutor assistant to conduct a front end assessment (FEA). 2. The Reliability and Validity of RANT®: All the assessment entries come with support from previous literature; that is, they are reliable and effective scientific evidence in terms of predicting the drug inmate’s criminogenic riskand medical demand. 3. The assessment result can be regarded by prosecutors as reference without jeopardizing the independence while exercising their authorized power. Since the result can also provide prosecutors with possible monitoring and treatment strategies for deferred prosecutions, some further integration and plans for the abovementioned strategies are to be suggested. 4. The localization of assessment: Since RANT®covers the drug inmate’s criminogenic risk and medical demand both sharing cross-cultural etic, and its assessing process bears certain logics as well, it is suggested to not include questions exclusive to Taiwan. 5. To amend related regulations and to plan the content of Taiwan’s treatment: Both Regulations for Implementing Drug Abstention and Treatment & Principles for Recognizing Treatment Completionand Narcotics Hazard Prevention and Control Actare in need of amendment. Since the current treatments mostly focus on judicial content, it is suggested to integrate with different fields, such as psychiatry, psychotherapy, public health, community-based intervention, etc., as far as future treatments are concerned, to find balance between judicial treatment and community-based treatment, and to incorporate various subsystems including domestic violence prevention centers and sexual assault prevention centers so that a complete treatment structure can be established. As far as the actual individual drug inmate assessment is concerned, this study conducted an RANT®pilot test on 34 participants receiving deferred prosecutions on their use of Schedule I and/or Schedule II drugs, and the assessment results suggest that the Chinese-version RANT®already contains the following distinguishing features: 1. Easy Readability: Most subjects can understand the meaning of the questions and therefore answer the questions rapidly and intuitively. 2. Satisfying Convenience: Averagely speaking, all participants can complete the questions in 10 minutes; the grading and risk assessing can also be done quickly. 3. Significant Reliability: The One-week Test-Retest Reliability of RANT®is 0.8. Conclusions and Suggestions: Based on the suggestions given by experts and the pilot test conducted, this study finds it necessary to eliminate the limitation in Article 24, deferred prosecution with conditionality for demanded/compulsory drug abstention and treatment in medical setting(Narcotics Hazard Prevention and Control) and return to multiple conditionality in order to put the triage of illicit drug users in to action. Since a more effective result of drug abstention andreturning to the society can be produced when adequate triage can be offered to illicit drug users according to their individual characteristics and demand, and when a multiple treatment project covering judicial diversion and monitoring, medical treatment, psychological counseling/therapy, social returning, etc. can be implemented, this study offers the following suggestions regarding the triage of illicit drug users, and they are: (1) Jumping out of the box of pharmacological/medication thinking and loosening the limitation in treatment to produce an outcome of a multiple community-based treatment suitable for different types of individual cases. (2) Encouraging private participation and developing multiple projects to meet the corrections of illicit drug users, criminals of all kinds and rehabilitated peoples and their needs to return to the society. (3) Giving full judicial authorization and simplifying the recognition procedures to avoid burdening the criminal justice system and to make prosecutors willing to give deferred prosecution with conditionality.  

● 文章連結：

https://goo.gl/XNeNyJ

● 資料來源：

政府研究資訊系統