本文選題：社區(qū) + 公安機(jī)關(guān)　； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】： 按照中國大陸地區(qū)現(xiàn)行法律的規(guī)定,對社區(qū)矯正對象的監(jiān)督管理主體是公安機(jī)關(guān),但是,由于公安機(jī)關(guān)集治安、偵查、行刑任務(wù)于一身,與非監(jiān)禁刑執(zhí)行的需求不符,與刑事司法機(jī)制運(yùn)行規(guī)則有沖突,且其肩負(fù)的打擊犯罪、維護(hù)社會治安等繁重任務(wù)令其無暇顧及對輕微刑事犯罪分子的監(jiān)管職責(zé),近年來,在對這種執(zhí)行模式進(jìn)行廣泛批判的同時(shí),刑事法學(xué)界和實(shí)踐部門不得不尋求和論證一套更為合理有效的執(zhí)行模式。自2003年最高人民檢察院、最高人民法院、公安部、司法部聯(lián)合下發(fā)《關(guān)于開展社區(qū)矯正工作試點(diǎn)的通知》以來,社區(qū)矯正試點(diǎn)逐步向全國范圍擴(kuò)展,“雙主體”模式進(jìn)入試行和磨合階段,即社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行主體逐步更換為司法行政機(jī)關(guān),公安機(jī)關(guān)轉(zhuǎn)而成為配合角色。應(yīng)當(dāng)說,社區(qū)矯正推行至今已有一些時(shí)日,兩種運(yùn)行機(jī)制優(yōu)劣應(yīng)有所顯現(xiàn),對執(zhí)行模式的比較研究有了一些經(jīng)驗(yàn)和實(shí)踐基礎(chǔ)。加之,目前有關(guān)執(zhí)行模式選擇的學(xué)術(shù)觀點(diǎn)呈現(xiàn)多元化,此時(shí),立足預(yù)防犯罪和保護(hù)人權(quán)需要,結(jié)合社區(qū)矯正試點(diǎn)成果,梳理辨析相關(guān)主張及根據(jù),論證執(zhí)行模式的合理構(gòu)建,是具有非常重要的理論和現(xiàn)實(shí)意義的。本文以此為題,試著探討我國社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行主體的構(gòu)建及如何加強(qiáng)其執(zhí)法力度與效果問題,以期對我國社區(qū)矯正工作的發(fā)展略盡綿薄之力。 本文除引言與結(jié)語外,正文共分四個(gè)部分,三萬余字。 第一部分:我國社區(qū)矯正現(xiàn)行的“雙主體”結(jié)構(gòu)及其特點(diǎn)。本部分簡單介紹了公安機(jī)關(guān)與司法行政機(jī)關(guān)并存的社區(qū)矯正現(xiàn)行管理模式,指出正是法律與相關(guān)部委的不同授權(quán)從而產(chǎn)生了“雙主體”結(jié)構(gòu),并造成了社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行過程中的諸多弊端。 第二部分:對社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行主體理論爭議的評析。除第一部分中概括列舉的法律法規(guī)做出不同規(guī)定的理由外,本部分重點(diǎn)介紹了理論界在該問題上的分歧,以及提出的更具體的設(shè)想,在此基礎(chǔ)上,本文對各方觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了正反兩方面的分析。 第三部分:社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行主體的應(yīng)然歸屬。本部分首先分析了確定社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行權(quán)歸屬時(shí)應(yīng)考慮的因素,之后明確提出本文觀點(diǎn)——將我國社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行主體的構(gòu)建分為兩個(gè)步驟,即過渡模式和最終模式。并指出,在過渡階段,由公安機(jī)關(guān)負(fù)責(zé)社區(qū)矯正中的刑事執(zhí)行工作,司法行政機(jī)關(guān)中的基層司法所負(fù)責(zé)矯治工作;最終,在司法行政機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部設(shè)立與監(jiān)獄部門相并列的專門機(jī)構(gòu)負(fù)責(zé)社區(qū)矯正工作。 第四部分:實(shí)現(xiàn)執(zhí)行權(quán)與相關(guān)權(quán)的良性互動。本部分將社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行權(quán)與治安權(quán)、司法權(quán)結(jié)合起來進(jìn)行論述,并得出社區(qū)矯正與刑罰目的及任務(wù)相一致,有利于實(shí)現(xiàn)刑罰效益并保障人權(quán)的結(jié)論。
[Abstract]:According to the current laws in mainland China, the main body of supervision and management of the objects of community correction is the public security organs. However, as the public security organs gather the tasks of public order, investigation and execution, they do not conform to the requirements of the execution of non-custodial sentences. Conflicts with the rules governing the operation of criminal justice mechanisms, and their heavy tasks of combating crime and maintaining public order have prevented them from taking into account their supervisory responsibilities over minor criminal offenders. At the same time, criminal law circles and practice departments have to seek and demonstrate a more reasonable and effective execution model. Since 2003, when the Supreme people's Procuratorate, the Supreme people's Court, the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Justice jointly issued a notice on the pilot project of community correction, the pilot project of community correction has been gradually expanded to the whole country. The mode of "double subject" has entered the stage of trial and running-in, that is, the executive subject of community correction is gradually replaced by judicial administrative organ, and the public security organ turns into a coordinating role. It should be said that it has been some time since the implementation of community correction, the advantages and disadvantages of the two operating mechanisms should be revealed, and the comparative study of the execution mode has some experience and practical basis. In addition, at present, the academic views on the choice of execution mode are diversified. At this time, based on the needs of crime prevention and human rights protection, combined with the experimental results of community correction, this paper analyzes and analyzes the relevant propositions and bases, and demonstrates the reasonable construction of the execution mode. Is of great theoretical and practical significance. This paper tries to discuss the construction of the main body of community correction and how to strengthen its law enforcement and effect in order to make a little contribution to the development of community correction in our country. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the text is divided into four parts, more than 30,000 words. The first part: the current double-subject structure and its characteristics of community correction in China. This part briefly introduces the current management mode of community correction, which is coexisting with the public security organs and the judicial administrative organs, and points out that it is the different authorization of the law and the relevant ministries that gives rise to the "dual subject" structure. And has caused many malpractices in the execution process of community correction. The second part: comment on the theory dispute of community correction executive subject. In addition to the reasons for the different provisions outlined in the first part, this section focuses on the differences in the theoretical community on this issue, as well as the more specific ideas put forward, on the basis of which, In this paper, the views of the parties are analyzed in both positive and negative aspects. The third part: community correction executive subject should belong. This part first analyzes the factors that should be considered in determining the ownership of community correction executive right, and then puts forward the point of view that the construction of the subject of community correction execution in China is divided into two steps, that is, transition mode and final mode. It is also pointed out that in the transitional period, the public security organs are responsible for the criminal execution of community corrections, and the basic judicial institutions in the judicial administration organs are responsible for the correction work. Within the judicial administration, a special institution, parallel to the prison department, is responsible for community correction. The fourth part: realize the benign interaction between executive power and related right. In this part, the author discusses the right of community correction, the right of public order and judicial power, and draws the conclusion that community correction is consistent with the purpose and task of punishment, which is beneficial to the realization of penalty benefit and the protection of human rights.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2009
【分類號】：D926.8

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 程瑩;我國社區(qū)矯正執(zhí)行主體研究[D];汕頭大學(xué);2011年

2 李翩翩;社區(qū)矯正主體研究[D];中國青年政治學(xué)院;2012年

，

本文編號：1840566