日本由於舊監獄法的受刑人權利救濟制度存有不少缺失，於西元2006 年5 月24日修正公布關於刑事收容設施及收容人處遇之法律，制定以下嶄新的救濟制度：申請審查與再審查、事實的申告、苦情的申出，設立由律師、學者、醫師等民間人士組成的刑事設施收容人不服審查調查檢討會及刑事設施視察委員會。反觀我國於民國35 年制定監獄行刑法後，迄今尚未修正之監獄行刑法第6 條規定，依立法當時受到特別權力關係理論影響的環境，立法者應無賦予受刑人得針對監獄事件提起司法救濟的機會，是修正監獄行刑法相關規定，為我國不可避免的選擇。至於得請求司法救濟之標的，本文以為無庸限縮在處分行為或具重大影響的處遇行為，應賦與受刑人對所有監獄事件提起司法救濟的機會。此或許會有受刑人訴訟案件明顯增加的狀況，但法院得藉此類型化監獄行刑事件之審理模式，依個案所涉事項之不同，建立寬嚴不同的審查密度。再者，對於受刑人刑期並無影響之處遇，亦可制定相關簡化訴訟程序的配套法規，以兼顧受刑人訴訟權之保障與訴訟經濟之要求。更重要的是，司法成本的隱憂縱然正當，但建立在特別權力關係上所劃分的爭訟界線，只是一種欠缺說理的武斷拒絕，萬不能作為解決的方案。

In order to facilitate the rehabilitation and resocialization of inmates, with due regard to their humanity, Japan began their reforms of the penal systems.The Act for Partial Revision of the Act on Penal Institutions and the Treatment of Sentenced Inmates which stipulates the treatment of unsentenced inmates was approved at the Ordinary Session of the Diet in 2006. The enforcement of the Act changed the title from "the Act on Penal Institutions and the Treatment of Sentenced Inmates" to "the Act on Penal and Detention Facilities and the Treatment of Inmates". The Prison Law in Japan then had been totally revised for the first time in nearly 100 years.Similarly, The Prison Act in the Repbublic of China (R.O.C) was enacted in 1946. Although the Prison Act has amended several times, it doesn't allow prisoners in the R.O.C the right of access to the court until now. The Judicial sytem in R.O.C refused to review prisoner complaints regarding conditions of confinement as well. While prisoner rights may be restricted by the facility and particular state of incarceration, prisoners do not lose their constitutional rights
when they are incarcerated. The reform of our Prison Law should be done right away. In my opinion, judicial cost and benefit is not a legitimate purpose to retraint the right of instituting legal proceedings of prisoners, prisoners should be all owed to file a lawsuit against all decisions made by prison officails.