{"error":false,"id":["170268"],"data":{"IVOD_ID":170268,"IVOD_URL":"https://ivod.ly.gov.tw/Play/Clip/1M/170268","日期":"2026-07-06","會議資料":{"會議代碼":"聯席會議-11-5-15,26-1","會議代碼:str":"第11屆第5會期內政、社會福利及衛生環境委員會第1次聯席會議","屆":11,"會期":5,"會次":1,"臨時會會次":null,"種類":"聯席會議","委員會代碼":[15,26],"委員會代碼:str":["內政委員會","社會福利及衛生環境委員會"],"標題":"第11屆第5會期內政、社會福利及衛生環境委員會第1次聯席會議"},"影片種類":"Clip","開始時間":"2026-07-06T09:04:05+08:00","結束時間":"2026-07-06T09:07:28+08:00","影片長度":"00:03:23","支援功能":["ai-transcript"],"video_url":"https://ivod-lyvod.cdn.hinet.net/vod_1/_definst_/mp4:1MClips/09e0feae5cc9a38ac7a723f0a246fcc2053ee76114b5cdb6cdf19627e219093817444451dbb786d95ea18f28b6918d91.mp4/playlist.m3u8","委員名稱":"林月琴","委員發言時間":"09:04:05 - 09:07:28","會議時間":"2026-07-06T08:00:00+08:00","會議名稱":"立法院第11屆第5會期內政、社會福利及衛生環境委員會第1次聯席會議（事由：一、審查委員林月琴等21人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法部分條文修正草案」案。二、審查委員王育敏等16人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法部分條文修正草案」案。三、審查委員莊瑞雄等16人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第二條及第四條條文修正草案」案。四、審查委員羅明才等18人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第十二條條文修正草案」案。五、審查委員羅廷瑋等16人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第十二條條文修正草案」案。六、審查委員翁曉玲等23人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第十二條條文修正草案」案。七、審查委員蘇清泉等29人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第十二條條文修正草案」案。八、審查委員廖先翔等22人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第三條、第四條及第九條條文修正草案」案。九、審查台灣民眾黨黨團擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第二條、第五條及第十二條條文修正草案」案。十、審查委員林宜瑾等18人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第五條條文修正草案」案。十一、審查委員陳瑩等19人擬具「跟蹤騷擾防制法第五條條文修正草案」案。【僅詢答】\n【7月6日、7月8日、兩天一次會】）","transcript":{"pyannote":[{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":0.19971875,"end":5.16096875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":5.58284375,"end":6.19034375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":6.730343750000001,"end":14.492843750000002},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":15.04971875,"end":20.70284375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":21.242843750000002,"end":45.34034375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":45.45846875,"end":48.85034375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":49.15409375,"end":61.844093750000006},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":61.91159375,"end":75.31034375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":75.58034375000001,"end":94.15971875000001},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":94.48034375,"end":109.98846875000001},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":110.17409375000001,"end":120.19784375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":120.68721875000001,"end":123.18471875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":123.69096875000001,"end":141.84846875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":142.11846875,"end":146.03346875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":146.16846875000002,"end":147.97409375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":148.37909375,"end":150.20159375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":150.43784375,"end":156.29346875000002},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":156.32721875000001,"end":166.62096875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":166.87409375000001,"end":172.86471875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":173.01659375,"end":176.00346875000002},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":176.50971875000002,"end":187.69784375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":188.25471875000002,"end":191.15721875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":191.79846875,"end":198.17721875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":198.44721875000002,"end":199.69596875000002},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":199.78034375000001,"end":200.79284375},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":201.38346875000002,"end":202.09221875},{"speaker":"SPEAKER_00","start":203.20596875,"end":203.52659375000002}],"whisperx":[{"start":0.589,"end":24.437,"text":"部長還有各位同仁我們今天討論如何更精進來現行的跟騷法我理解當初主管機關在制定這部法律的時候是考量到眾多的跟騷行為當中針對於具有高危險性的也就是性與性別相關的跟騷行為先建立基本的防護網可是上路四年以來"},{"start":25.297,"end":44.902,"text":"第一線的實務顯示現行制度已經出現了保護落差首先跟騷的樣態行為已經高度數位化跟多元化包括匿名帳號持續訊息騷擾無聲的電話定位追蹤等行為這些行為已經構成了長期壓迫跟心理危險"},{"start":45.626,"end":61.592,"text":"可是卻常以困難證明與性或性別相關導致無法進入保護機制那監察院的報告也指出第一線的執法人員在面對此類案件時往往要自行判斷看案件是否成立"},{"start":62.119,"end":79.304,"text":"造成警察跟司法機關認定不一致甚至出現同一行為在不同程序當中評價完全不同的狀況這不僅提高執法成本也讓被害人陷入法律保護的落差多數國家在處理跟騷行為的時候也都強調行為跟結果的導向"},{"start":81.284,"end":106.751,"text":"美國跟澳洲的相關法制重點都在行為是否被害人產生合理的恐懼是否造成生活重大的干擾跟精神壓迫而非要求證明特定性別跟性動機所以第二個核心問題在於相對人的處遇不足現在的處遇計畫局限在醫療性的一個治療導致適用門檻過高執行案件數非常的低"},{"start":107.27,"end":123.108,"text":"雖然有將近34.8%的被害人在申請保護令時同時勾選了我們的處遇需求但法院最終核發處遇令的竟然只有六件真正執行的完成的目前也只有一件而已"},{"start":123.752,"end":145.954,"text":"因此我們在這次提出的修法重點有三項第一刪除與性或性別相關的構成要件並明確豁免條款在擴大保護的同時也讓第一線的人員有明確的判斷的標準第二強化相對人的處遇機制將認知教育跟心理輔導納入法律的框架讓適用的門檻降低"},{"start":148.436,"end":175.615,"text":"提升行為矯正跟再犯的預防的效果此外也因應數位跟跟燒的氾濫以及各自保護的需求我覺得應該將濫用跟冒用特定人的資料納入跟燒法的保護當中並要求保護令不得記載被害人的住所跟聯絡資訊由法院來主動保密避免被害人承受二次傷害風險因最後我要強調跟燒行為具有高度的危險性"},{"start":177.507,"end":201.553,"text":"約25%到35%的根燒案件最後最終都發展成身體暴力遭到我們的親密關係殺害的女性當中更有高達76%的在她被害前曾遭受根燒的狀況這個是修法核心我覺得是讓根燒法做到可及時預防介入並且確實發揮保護的功能以上謝謝"}]}},"supported_relations":[],"relations":[]}