本文從法律制度層面出發，探究現行法和戰前中國主要針對盜匪、共匪的「自新」與「自首」制度。除了傳統的「改過自新」意涵外，從檔案中分析並類型化二二八事件中自首與自新的規範方式，以及政府運用的情形，探究其實行成效，並就幾個個別案例進行細部觀察。 　　「自新」這種效果不明的法律制度，在二二八事件中被各地大量運用，人數高達數千。而個案中自新的要件、程序、准許與否、自新人的待遇、自新後是否須再受司法追訴等，均十分不明確，充滿人為操作空間。自新制度是在嚴刑峻法、軍事壓迫下，極具彈性的懷柔措施，明顯違背法治國家原則。 　　在實際運作上，自新人被政府附條件又賦予義務的交保釋放、列冊控管，甚至試圖進行思想改造。各地自新人與連保人名單，成為綏靖清鄉之後，政府統治、控制戰後臺灣社會的重要資訊，自新人甚至被要求成為線民、交付任務，成為政府社會監控系統的一環。

From the legal perspective, this article examines the pre-war practices of “Guilt-redemption” and “Self-incrimination” applied to bandits and communist rebels in China and the related current laws using selected cases from the 228 Incident archives. The practice of “Guilt-redemption” was widely applied in the aftermath of 228 Incident involving several thousands of individuals. Its legal effects were poorly defined and the legal procedures remained ambiguous, thus leaving much leeway for human maneuver and manipulation. It served as a flexible conciliatory measure implemented under Draconian military oppression and its nature violated the principles of “Rechtsstaat” The case studies reveal that individuals subjected to “Guilt-redemption” would be released on bail only after accepting state-imposed conditions and obligations. They would remain under surveillance or undergo ideological reeducation. The name lists of these individuals on bail for “Guilt-redemption” were important intelligence for the government for state control. Some of them were recruited as informants or were given missions to accomplish, thus turning them into state instruments for social surveillance in post-war Taiwan.

二二八事件;自新;自首

228 Incident ; Guilt-Redemption; Self-incrimination