本研究專注於台灣冤獄平反協會（Taiwan Innocence Project, TIP）如何在特定的歷史與制度脈絡中，發展出一套獨特的冤案救援行動與分類邏輯。不同於既有將冤案視為單一司法個案以及冤案成因的研究取徑，本研究以社會學視角，透過「歷史—組織—行動者」的三層架構，分析TIP的組織特性與發展策略。本研究之研究資料從1951年起蒐集至2023年止，並分析TIP官方資料，如電子報、論壇紀錄、工作報告、活動紀錄和書籍等出版品；最終，透過深度訪談TIP五位成員，以獲得更全面的資料。本研究首先揭示了冤案論述的三段式演變：一、無聲的悲訴：冤案一直都在只是不可「評論」（1950至1987）；二、大鳴大悲：民間組織的成立與體制對抗的激進氛圍（約1987年至2011年前後）；三、順勢而為：專門救援冤案的組織成立（2011年迄今），來說明冤案認知框架的三階段轉移。除了探討冤案認知框架的發展階段與內涵特性外，也聚焦於TIP在結構機會以及在制度邏輯與路徑依賴的影響下，如何架構出冤案敘事、選案邏輯、推廣策略以及解析專業化救援過程所帶來的雙面刃。最後，本研究主張，冤案不僅是司法錯誤的修正現場，更應視為知識生產與冤案認知翻轉的過程，TIP在體制內外透過敘事策略與分類技術，翻轉社會對冤案的理解框架，並在專業信任的建構中拓展民間組織介入司法的可能性。此一分析不僅補足了冤案研究中對組織面向的不足，也有助於深化我們對公民社會如何介入法律制度運作的理解。
The study first reconstructs a three-stage evolution of Taiwan’s wrongful-conviction discourse: (1) Muted Lament (1950–1987), in which wrongful convictions persisted but largely fell outside the bounds of public commentary; (2) Outcry and Confrontation (ca. 1987–2011), marked by the emergence of civic organizations and a contentious, oppositional stance toward the state; and (3) Working with the Grain (2011–present), characterized by the establishment of specialized innocence organizations. Beyond periodization, the analysis shows how, amid structural opportunities and under the shaping forces of institutional logics and path dependence, TIP crafts wrongful-conviction narratives, builds a case-selection logic, and designs outreach strategies—while also revealing the double-edged consequences of professionalized advocacy.
The study argues that wrongful-conviction work is not merely the rectification of judicial error but also a process of knowledge production and cognitive reframing. Operating across institutional boundaries, TIP deploys narrative strategies and classificatory techniques that reconfigure societal understandings of wrongful convictions and, by building professional credibility, expand the possibilities for civil-society engagement with the judiciary. This analysis not only addresses a neglected organizational dimension within wrongful-conviction scholarship but also deepens our understanding of how civil society intervenes in the operation of legal institutions.
