刑事審判的審前準備程序在2003年刑事訴訟法修正獲得初步的發展，在審判正式開始之前，為顧及審判的充實與迅速進行，有了一定準備工作的規定。但實施十多年來，因為種種因素，包括法制的不夠健全，實務對於審前整理的誘因不足，即使透過案件流程管理來因應，似乎仍未能達到預期效果。適逢近年來關於人民參與刑事審判的議題討論甚盛，提供了一個改變的契機。因為可以想見在有人民參與的審判中（無論陪審或參審），勢必要更扎實地來實施審前準備，否則不僅無法讓審理順利進行，反而可能造成程序延宕，甚至錯誤判決。而且在審理之前，為求公平審判，如果未採取起訴 狀一本，讓審判者接觸到全部卷證，也可能造成預斷，而這 也需要在審前準備程序中，加以考量，並配合準備程序進行 當事人間的證據開示。 日本實施人民參與審判制度前，也曾面臨同樣的問題， 而他們配合2005 年的修法，不僅建構新的審前準備程序， 甚至先行適用於一般案件的審理，為2009 年正式實施的裁 判員制度預作準備，並且配合原先的起訴狀一本，更補強證 據開示與強化審檢辯三方在審前準備程序的義務，雖然有仍 有些許疑義，但有助於裁判員制度的實行。 因此本文先探討現行法中有關審前準備的相關問題，檢 視現有法制與實務上的問題，同時借鏡於日本的制度，為未 來應有的審前準備程序提供若干修法方向與意見。

The preparatory proceedings before a criminal trial initiated in the revision of criminal procedure act in 2003. In order to have a trial firmly and rapidly, it required more effective preparatory work pretrial. But 10 and more years passed, it seem that the proceedings didn’t do as well as expected. Due to many factors, they include the insufficient articles to rule, lack of incentive for court and so on. Though a cases flow management system was considered, it can’t called enough. In recent Taiwan, the discussion about lay participation in criminal trial arises again. It gives an opportunity to change. And it will be a good time to review the present preparatory proceedings. It goes without saying that the preparatory proceeding is crucial when layperson participating in a criminal trial. Otherwise, the trial might be delayed, and even resulted in the wrongful verdict. In addition, if the principle of indictment-only is not adopted and the judges can touched all evidences and records, it can’t called a fair court. The indictment-only and discovery shall also be taken into account. It is a good example of Japan. In 2004, a new lay judge system was ready to go. Before the lay judge system formally took into effect in 2009, a new preparatory proceed was constructed and implemented in 2005. Accompanying with the principle of indictment-only and evidence discovery, it also obligates the judge, prosecutor and lawyer to prepare and promote the trial proceeding smoothly. In this article, the author firstly analyzes the present situation of preparatory proceedings in Taiwan and finds problems among them. Referring to the situation of Japan, some opinions and directions are provided to the future improvement of preparatory proceedings.