[討論] ChatGPT幫我找的國會說謊坐牢條文

不知道對不對
你們自己看吧

美國

LII U.S. Code Title 18 PART I CHAPTER 47 ? 1001
Quick search by citation:
Title
Section
18 U.S. Code ? 1001 - Statements or entries generally
U.S. Code
Notes
prev | next
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of

這裡的legislative指的應該就是美國國會

the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves

說謊會被判五年以下有期徒刑

international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.
(b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
(c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to—
(1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
(2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.

英國
Perjury.
(1)If any person lawfully sworn as a witness or as an interpreter in a judicial proceeding wilfully makes a statement material in that proceeding, which heknows to be false or does not believe to be true, he shall be guilty of perjury, and shall, on conviction thereof on indictment, be liable to penal servitude for a term not exceeding seven years, or to imprisonment . . . F1 for a term not exceeding two years, or to a fine or to both
說謊會被判兩年以下有期徒刑

such penal servitude or imprisonment and fine.

(2)The expression “judicial proceeding” includes a proceeding before any cou
rt, tribunal, or person having by law power to hear, receive, and examine evidence on oath.

這邊看起來都是在講法院審判
除了person having by law power to hear, receive, and examine evidence on oath.

立委算是有檢視證據權力的人嗎？
如果算的話
那ChatGPT就沒有找錯

(3)Where a statement made for the purposes of a judicial proceeding is not made before the tribunal itself, but is made on oath before a person authorised by law to administer an oath to the person who makes the statement, and to record or authenticate the statement, it shall, for the purposes of this section,be treated as having been made in a judicial proceeding.

(4)A statement made by a person lawfully sworn in England for the purposes ofa judicial proceeding—

(a)in another part of His Majesty’s dominions; or

(b)in a British tribunal lawfully constituted in any place by sea or land outside His Majesty’s dominions; or

(c)in a tribunal of any foreign state,

shall, for the purposes of this section, be treated as a statement made in a judicial proceeding in England.
(5)Where, for the purposes of a judicial proceeding in England, a person is lawfully sworn under the authority of an Act of Parliament—

(a)in any other part of His Majesty’s dominions; or

(b)before a British tribunal or a British officer in a foreign country, or within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England;

a statement made by such person so sworn as aforesaid (unless the Act of Parliament under which it was made otherwise specifically provides) shall be treated for the purposes of this section as having been made in the judicial proceeding in England for the purposes whereof it was made.
(6)The question whether a statement on which perjury is assigned was materia
l is a question of law to be determined by the court of trial.

https://i.imgur.com/s1qK43a.jpeg

你可以解釋一下上面的法條是偽證罪還是藐視國會罪嗎？

條文是我自己上網抓的 不是ChatGPT掰的 你看一下條文內容對不對

那上面的法條是什麼罪？有處罰在國會說謊嗎？

這和法系無關 純粹討論其他國家國會說謊會如何

那段？我不知道

台灣的我會分 美國英國的我不會 你幫我把上面的條文分類一下

國會聽「證」 這個「證」的確是witness的意思 不然你的英文老師怎麼教？

這我知道 你看國會改革法條文就知道了 你要表達什麼？

我這篇只是在討論美國和英國有沒有 不是在討論台灣

你還是沒有解釋黃國昌騙我什麼？ 我知道國外沒有反質詢罪 但是國會聽證說謊會被抓去關 台灣只會罰錢 我們的想法一致嗎？

我早就搞懂了 你能講一些有內容的東西嗎？

他什麼時候講的？ 有連結嗎？

相對來說，美國就有發展出形式處罰，就必須牽涉到法院。對美國人而言，國會針對個案判 斷完之後，是否有權力自己去抓人、處罰，這是有疑慮的。所以在美國如果要走到處罰程序 ，其實就是刑事訴訟的邏輯。是由國會相關委員會會先議決證人構成藐視，提到院會全院再 表決，確認有藐視行為之後，議長會把案件轉到檢察體系，由檢調去判斷是否構成，而國會 不能指揮檢察體系。 這就是黃國昌昨天質詢講的內容 然後行政院長一直跳針 傻眼

大法官承認立法院有調查權 只是有限制 釋585 基於權力分立與制衡原則，立法院調查權所得調查之對象或事項，並非毫無限制 所以有什麼問題？

你解釋一下啊

你解釋一下啊