台灣之刑事訴訟法近幾年經歷大幅度之修正，該修正之動因主要在於反應台灣社會之民主化及憲政之正常化等因素。因此，例如刑事訴訟法第一百五十八條之四明文主張，應「均衡維護」「人權保障及公共利益」，即不再如威權國家般片面以國家利益為主。雖然相關改革已相當成形，但在此時刻仍值得反思，在繼受過程曾經當母法之德國刑事訴訟法在類似的時機呈現那些變遷，並且依此為基礎進一步考慮，尚未完成之台灣刑事訴訟法改革將來是否應考慮到許些過去未受注目之領域或問題。 　　在具體的分析而言，本文不可能將百餘年以來之德國刑事訴訟法的修正法案逐一討論，所以首先以形式分析指出，該法之修正頻率呈現那些特徵'並且由此檢視個別法條以及個別章、節之特殊現象。基於此，可以顯現刑事訴訟法長年以來之內在特徵。接下來應反省，相關修正法案及其所顯示的特點在德國整體刑法之改造所扮演的角色為何？德國修正法案經常所採取之包裹立法的立法方式及立法運作又具有何重要性？ 　　基於此，本文導出其結論，並且說明德國刑事訴訟法之歷年修正法案對於刑事訴訟以及對於整體刑法等現象之改造有何重要性，其所表現的修正模式具有那些特徵值得由台灣刑事訴訟法改革加以參考。

　　Since a couple of years, Taiwan engages in a comprehensive reform of its Criminal Procedure Law; the motivation of such reform process draws upon a reflection of factors like the democratization of Taiwanese society and the normalization of its constitutional and political system. Therefore, Criminal Procedure Act Art.158-4 explicitly states the requirement of ‘balancing’ ‘protection of human rights and public interests’, which means the one sided emphasis on state interests that was prevalent during former times of autocratic rule does not exist any longer. Although various waves of new legislation brought the reform process to a respectable level, it might still be time to reflect upon historic changes of German Criminal Procedure law. The latter had not only been a raw model for the original Criminal Procedure Law of the Republic of China, but witnessed similar socio-political changes of its environment. Due to this, it might show problems with criminal procedure the are not yet adequately addressed by Taiwan's current reform movement. In terms of factual analysis, this paper is unable to analyze each change that has occurred on every paragraph during the last one a quarter of a centuries, but has to engage in a formal analysis that brings to light paragraphs and chapters with high or low frequency of legislative change. On this basis, characteristics of long term changes can be shown and discussed. Ina further step, the narrow scope of Criminal Procedure Law proper will be left behind in order to ask for the function of relevant changes within the broader realm of criminal law. Especially technique and achievements of legislative packaging will be scrutinized. 　　As a consequence, this paper will show certain aspects of legislative changes to Criminal Procedure Law, that - a1though overlooked in the past - are worthy of consideration during a future deepening of the Taiwanese reform process.