As we know, on one hand, the criminal mandatory measures limit or even deprive from the fundamental right: the personal freedom of the suspect who is protected by the presumption of innocence; on the other hand, the criminal mandatory measures play an important role to ensure the smoothness of criminal proceedings. Without a doubt, the criminal mandatory measure system is an important part of the entire criminal procedure system, and based on this duality of the criminal mandatory measures, the current "Criminal Procedure Code" of Macao Special Administrative Region has a special section to regulate the whole criminal mandatory measure system in detail. Actually, although the current "Criminal Procedure Code" of Macao Special Administrative Region has been in force for at least 18 years, without any significant changes of the criminal mandatory measure system in many of the amendments. However, it does not mean that there is no controversy in the judicial practice. On the contrary, several issues have aroused a heated discussion of the academics and the judicial officials. Thus, the author wants to discuss several more controversial issues in the judicial practice about the criminal mandatory measure system of Macao Special Administrative Region, giving personal view and making some suggestions for improvement. The thesis is composed by three parts: the preface, the text and the conclusion, the text has four chapters, along the following lines: The preface indicates the reason and purpose of this writing. Chapter one makes a brief introduction about the basic concepts and characteristics of the criminal mandatory measures, and also introduces the types of the criminal mandatory measures and the general principles which should be complied in Macao Special Administrative Region. Chapter two describes several issues and controversies in the judicial practice about the topic how to properly use the criminal mandatory measures in Macao Special Administrative Region, and introduces several opinions by the academics and the judicial officials related to these issues. Chapter three focuses on when to apply the criminal mandatory measures in the judicial practice, the main two issues. First, when without the initiation from the Public Prosecutions Office or without hearing the suspect's prior statements, the judge decide to apply any types of the criminal mandatory measures, how to find a legal or procedural solution about this issues; and second, is it possible that the judge can use the criminal mandatory measures which are different from the suggestion of the Public Prosecutions Office. Also, the author will analyze the above issues and make some recommendations for improvement of the current legal system. Chapter four discusses the issues about the system reform, is it possible that the Public Prosecutions Office can directly apply all types of the criminal mandatory measures for suspects, including: information on identity or residence, security, report regularly, restraint from leaving Macao or contacting some people, be suspended from duties, occupation or exercise of rights and custody. The author will also analyze the above issue in the theoretical perspective and the current legal system of Macao Special Administrative Region. The conclusion expresses the vision for the future of the criminal mandatory measure system and acknowledgements.

眾所周知，刑事強制措施一方面限制甚或剝奪受“無罪推定原則＂所保護 的嫌犯之基本權利──人身自由，但另一方面對保障刑事訴訟程序的有序進行 起著舉足輕重之作用。毫無疑問，刑事強制措施制度為整個刑事訴訟制度中的 一個重要組成部分，且基於其這種雙重的性質，澳門特別行政區現行的《刑事 訴訟法典》就設有專門章節詳細規範有關刑事強制措施之整套制度。 誠然，澳門特別行政區現行的《刑事訴訟法典》生效至今已達 18 年之久， 但在多次的修訂中均未有對刑事強制措施制度作任何重要的修改。然而，這並 不代表其在司法實踐上毫無爭議；相反，若干議題已引起學術界及司法界之熱 烈討論。有見及此，筆者本人欲透過本文探討澳門特別行政區現行的刑事強制 措施制度在司法實踐過程中所存在的若干較具爭議性之問題，並對這些問題提 出個人的看法及改善建議。 本論文共分為前言、正文以及結語三大部分，其中正文部分又由四個章節 組成，其內容大致如下： 前言部分主要闡述撰寫本文之原因及目的。 正文第一章主要對刑事強制措施的基本概念及其特點作一簡單介紹，並介 紹了現行澳門特別行政區刑事強制措施的種類及其適用時應遵從之一般原則 等等。 正文第二章主要就如何合理地採用刑事強制措施這一課題上，探討現行澳 門特別行政區刑事強制措施制度在司法實踐中所衍生之實務問題及爭議，並介 紹了部分學術界及司法界對相關問題之見解。 正文第三章主要探討在司法實踐中採用刑事強制措施時兩大爭議問題， 分別是：法官在欠缺檢察院之聲請或未有事先聽取嫌犯的陳述下採用任何一種 刑事強制措施時法律上或程序上的解決方法；以及法官是否可以選擇採用與檢 察院聲請不同的刑事強制措施。並在現有法制之框架下對有關事宜進行分析並 提出改善建議。 第四章所探討的為一制度改革之問題，探討是否可以將刑事強制措施之決 定權（包括：“身分資料及居所之書錄＂、“擔保＂、“定期報到之義務＂、 “禁止離境及接觸＂、“執行職務、從事職業或行使權利之中止＂以及“羈 押＂）賦予檢察院行使，並分別從理論角度以及澳門特別行政區現行的法律體 制框架下進行分析。 結語部分主要表達筆者本人對於有關刑事強制措施制度未來的展望以及 致謝。