【摘要】：自20世紀70年代以來,刑事和解計劃在美國得以廣泛推廣,1994年美國律師協(xié)會(American Bar Association)認可刑事和解、1995年全國被害人援助組織(The National Organization for Victim Assistance)批準恢復性社區(qū)司法模式,刑事和解作為一項基本法律制度在美國實現(xiàn)了合法化。作為現(xiàn)代刑事制度轉型過程中的產物,刑事和解在中國亦被廣泛應用于刑事案件領域。雖然我國現(xiàn)行刑事訴訟法并沒有明文規(guī)定刑事和解制度,但是刑事和解實踐在部分省市盛行,對在法律上規(guī)定和解制度的呼聲也越來越高。作為刑事和解制度的基本內容之一,保密義務在整個制度中的意義顯得格外重大。但就現(xiàn)狀而言,我國刑事理論界與司法實務界在推廣刑事和解制度過程中均缺乏保密義務意識。刑事和解制度中規(guī)定保密義務有利于保障加害人的憲法權利、提高和解效益、保證調解員的中立與公正以及促進刑事司法“調審分離”制度化,如果沒有保密制度,被害人與加害人之間就不能進行有意義的對話與交流,最終必然導致和解制度的流產,所以在構建我國刑事和解制度時必須對保密義務這一要素加以重視。在推廣刑事和解過程中,美國相關法律法規(guī)以及判例都對保密義務作了較多較完善的規(guī)定,研究美國刑事和解中的保密義務對構建及完善我國刑事和解保密制度有重要借鑒意義。文章以美國的刑事和解保密制度為藍本,采用歷史分析、案件分析和比較分析的方法,從刑法學、犯罪學、刑事政策學、刑事訴訟法學等多學科相結合的角度對美國刑事和解中的保密義務進行全面的分析,總結并借鑒其有益經驗,提出對構建我國刑事和解保密制度的啟示。文章首先對刑事和解保密義務進行概述,闡述刑事和解的基本理論和保密義務的概念、范圍以及其正當性;然后通過分析美國規(guī)定保密義務的法律法規(guī)以及和解保密判例,進一步了解美國的保密義務體系;最后歸納總結美國刑事和解中的保密義務對我國刑事和解制度構建的啟示,提出構建我國刑事和解保密制度的基本設想,包括保密義務的主體、享有保密特權的信息范圍及其例外以及違反保密義務的法律后果。
[Abstract]:Since the 1970s, criminal reconciliation programs have been widely promoted in the United States. The American Bar Association (American Bar Association) recognized criminal reconciliation in 1994, and the National victim Assistance Organization (The National Organization for Victim Assistance) approved the restorative community justice model in 1995. As a basic legal system, criminal reconciliation has been legalized in the United States. As a result of the transformation of modern criminal system, criminal reconciliation is also widely used in the field of criminal cases in China. Although the current criminal procedure law of our country does not explicitly stipulate the criminal reconciliation system, the practice of criminal reconciliation prevails in some provinces and cities, and the voice of prescribing the reconciliation system in the law is becoming more and more high. As one of the basic contents of the criminal reconciliation system, the duty of confidentiality is of great significance in the whole system. However, as far as the present situation is concerned, both the criminal theorists and the judicial practitioners lack the sense of confidentiality obligation in the process of promoting the criminal reconciliation system. The obligation of confidentiality in the system of criminal reconciliation is conducive to safeguarding the constitutional rights of perpetrators, improving the efficiency of reconciliation, ensuring the neutrality and impartiality of mediators and promoting the institutionalization of the separation of criminal justice from trial, if there is no system of confidentiality, There is no meaningful dialogue and communication between the victim and the perpetrator, which will inevitably lead to the miscarriage of the reconciliation system. Therefore, we must attach importance to the key element of the obligation of confidentiality in the construction of the criminal reconciliation system in our country. In the process of promoting criminal reconciliation, the relevant laws and regulations and precedents of the United States have made more and more perfect provisions on the obligation of confidentiality. The study of the secrecy obligation in American criminal reconciliation is of great significance to the construction and perfection of our criminal reconciliation secrecy system. Based on the American criminal reconciliation and secrecy system, the article adopts the methods of historical analysis, case analysis and comparative analysis, from the aspects of criminal law, criminology, criminal policy. This paper makes a comprehensive analysis of the obligation of secrecy in criminal reconciliation in the United States from the angle of the combination of criminal procedure law and other disciplines, summarizes and draws lessons from its beneficial experience, and puts forward the enlightenment to the construction of the secrecy system of criminal reconciliation in our country. Firstly, the article summarizes the obligation to keep secret of criminal reconciliation, expounds the basic theory of criminal reconciliation and the concept, scope and legitimacy of the obligation of confidentiality. Then through the analysis of the laws and regulations of the United States to provide confidentiality obligations as well as conciliatory confidentiality cases to further understand the confidentiality obligations of the United States system; Finally, it summarizes the enlightenment of the secrecy obligation in the criminal reconciliation of the United States to the construction of the criminal reconciliation system of our country, and puts forward the basic idea of constructing the secrecy system of the criminal reconciliation in our country, including the subject of the duty of confidentiality. The scope of confidential information and its exceptions, as well as the legal consequences of breach of confidentiality obligations.
【學位授予單位】：湘潭大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D971.2;D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 胡玉凌;;商事仲裁的保密性研究[J];北京仲裁;2005年04期

2 石磊;;論我國刑事和解制度的刑事實體法根據(jù)[J];法商研究;2006年05期

3 王新清;李蓉;;論刑事訴訟中的合意問題——以公訴案件為視野的分析[J];法學家;2003年03期

4 郭玉軍,梅秋玲;仲裁的保密性問題研究[J];法學評論;2004年02期

5 周建華;;司法調解的保密原則[J];時代法學;2008年05期

6 朱景文;解決爭端方式的選擇——一個比較法社會學的分析[J];吉林大學社會科學學報;2003年05期

7 鄭晶;;美國調解機密性理論與實踐及其借鑒意義[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學院學報;2006年05期

8 宋英輝;;論刑事程序中的權衡原則[J];法學研究;1993年05期

9 陳光中;;刑事和解的理論基礎與司法適用[J];人民檢察;2006年10期

10 劉方權;恢復性司法:一個概念性框架[J];山東警察學院學報;2005年01期

相關博士學位論文 前3條

1 劉艷萍;美國刑事政策研究[D];中國政法大學;2008年

2 何挺;現(xiàn)代刑事糾紛及其解決[D];中國政法大學;2008年

3 蔡國芹;刑事調解制度研究[D];上海交通大學;2009年

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 余林明;調解保密法律制度研究[D];暨南大學;2007年

，

本文編號：2405984