國際人權法在我國法院之適用--以精障者是否可科處死刑為例

Since the Enforcement Law for ICCPR and ICESCR is enacted in Taiwan, how should the Taiwanese courts interpret and apply both treaties? This is an important question in theory and in practice. Additionally, are the ICCPR and the ICESCR internationally binding for ROC? In other words, is Taiwan legally bound by the Enforcement Law of ICCPR and ICESCR only? Is releasing national human rights report a legal obligation for Taiwan? Has Taiwan fulfilled the state responsibility of report requested by Article 40 of ICCPR and Article 16 of ICESCR through self-submitting and reviewing the state report in 2013? Is the Concluding Observations 2013 provided by a panel of international human rights experts in the process of reviewing the state report legally binding for Taiwan? Is the binding force based on international law or domestic law? Taking two cases ruled by the Supreme Court as examples, this article aims to discuss whether death penalty should be imposed on mentally retarded people. The differences between the discourses concerning the international human rights conventions maintained by the Supreme Court in these cases are compared. The problems of interpreting and applying the human rights conventions are pinpointed. Suggestions are provided at the end.