| Summary: | 碩士 === 國立金門大學 === 海洋與邊境管理學系碩士班 === 106 === Taiwan government allowed the citizens visiting relatives and touring in Mainland China since 1987. Cross-strait relation was getting closed. The mutual conomic and trade was frequent. The convenience was based on the liberalization of the telecommunications and financial industry. Cross-border crime problomes were appeared, especially in using communication facilities(telephones, mobilephones, internet, online banks etc.) This was different from the tradional fraud tricks. The newly developing telecom fraud crimes were from cross-strait, spreading to sourtheast Asia region. It became common crime problems in the different regions around the world. The issue of non-tradional threats to security derivatived the problem of cross-strait public security, justice, and sovereignty.
The new type of Taiwanese telecom fraud crime raised in the 90s. The
frauding amout from people was raised continuously. Because of the police deparment(National Police Administration) and Investigation Bureau(MOJ) striked crime vigorously. The organized preoceeds of crime from Taiwanese scam gangs reduced and also the probability of accomplished offense decreased. It made crime gangs escaped to Mainland China and overseas of the cross-strait. They engaged the larger scale, more organized, and well planed cross-boarder telecom fraud crime. In the case of Kenya scam, the Chinese ministry of public security proposed the reason of telecom fraud victim benefit protection. China insisted on repatriating Taiwanese criminal suspects to Mainlad China for the criminal investigation and holding the trial in the Chinese court. Taiwan government protested strongly and it said “this case was prejudicially to the dignity of Taiwan’s sovereignty and human rights. ” The judicial community were frequently discussing the issue about the jurisdiction liability of cross-border crime.
To clarify the debate of the criminal law jurisdiction liability, this research comments the efficiency of "Cross-strait Joint Fight against Crime and Mutual Legal Assistance Agreement". The cross-strait judicial units are facing active, professional, organization-division crime gangs in the points of judicial, information and telecom investigation. This research quoted the actual cases of co-operation of fighting telecom fraud and refer to the judicial decision to analyze the mechanism of cross-strait joint fighting crime, and made the comments of the criminal law jurisdiction liability and its challenge. I expect this paper could be taken as the reference for the academia and the authority.
|
|---|
