本文選題：公訴意見 + 法律文書��； 參考：《西南政法大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文

【摘要】：公訴意見書是指在公訴案件的開庭審理中，出席法庭支持公訴的公訴人用于代表人民檢察院在法庭上發(fā)表對(duì)證據(jù)和案件情況所持意見的法律文書，它建立在法庭調(diào)查的基礎(chǔ)上，是對(duì)指控的犯罪事實(shí)進(jìn)一步說明論證�，F(xiàn)行控辯分離的庭審制度，使得公訴人在法庭調(diào)查和法庭辯論階段的表現(xiàn)越來越重要，如何發(fā)揮公訴意見書在刑事訴訟中的功能，不僅僅是文書寫作與發(fā)表的技巧性問題，還關(guān)系著檢察機(jī)關(guān)公訴權(quán)能的有效行使。本文通過對(duì)貴陽市C區(qū)人民檢察院的公訴意見書進(jìn)行調(diào)查研究，分析公訴意見書在實(shí)踐中運(yùn)行的效果、存在的問題，并分析其存在問題的原因，提出對(duì)策建議，以期對(duì)司法實(shí)踐有所裨益。 全文除引言、結(jié)束語外，共分成四個(gè)部分，共1.6萬余字： 第一部分是調(diào)查的目的與方法。檢察法律文書改革之前，公訴意見書一直被納入檢察機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部工作文書，2002年后公訴意見書被規(guī)定為法律文書，時(shí)隔十年，公訴意見書的格式化及其規(guī)范化管理運(yùn)行狀態(tài)如何，是此次調(diào)查的目的。調(diào)查方法采取了案卷調(diào)查法和觀察訪問法。 第二部分是實(shí)踐中公訴意見書所存在的問題。本部分根據(jù)調(diào)查以及問題歸類的需要，結(jié)合調(diào)查結(jié)果將公訴意見書存在的問題分為四個(gè)部分。首先是形式方面存在的問題：（1）公訴意見書的格式不規(guī)范，沒有嚴(yán)格遵照?qǐng)?zhí)行高檢院關(guān)于公訴意見書的格式規(guī)范。（2）出庭及監(jiān)督的法律依據(jù)引用不當(dāng)。（3）指派主體引述不正確。其次是內(nèi)容方面存在的問題：（1）證據(jù)的論證解釋不足，公訴人除了向法庭舉證，還應(yīng)當(dāng)就證據(jù)到案件事實(shí)的演繹過程作出說明。（2）公訴意見過于簡單、流于形式，沒有達(dá)到將辯論焦點(diǎn)集中于訴訟爭點(diǎn)上。（3）法律適用論證僵硬，泛泛而談。再次是操作流程方面存在的問題:（1）公訴人制作公訴意見書比較隨意，沒有嚴(yán)格規(guī)范的制作程序。（2）公訴意見書審批程序的缺失，導(dǎo)致了其在制作、審批、糾錯(cuò)程序上的混亂。最后是公訴人的主觀認(rèn)知方面存在的問題，（1）公訴人對(duì)公訴意見書的認(rèn)知模糊，質(zhì)疑將公訴意見文書化的必要。（2）對(duì)公訴意見書的重視不夠。 第三部分是對(duì)公訴意見書實(shí)踐中存在的問題進(jìn)行原因分析。一是對(duì)公訴意見書的錯(cuò)誤定位，將其限定在法庭調(diào)查結(jié)束后、法庭辯論開始時(shí)的公訴發(fā)言，造成公訴意見書內(nèi)容的不完整。二是公訴意見書程序設(shè)計(jì)的缺陷，，造成其文書性質(zhì)的虛化。三是法院、檢察院對(duì)公訴意見書的重視不夠，缺乏促進(jìn)和保障公訴意見書發(fā)揮其訴訟價(jià)值的制度和激勵(lì)措施，使得實(shí)踐中公訴意見書質(zhì)量堪憂。四是公訴意見書的預(yù)制性與庭審的不確定性間的矛盾，造成有的公訴意見書與公訴人在法庭上的口頭發(fā)言不一致，或者有的應(yīng)變能力不足的公訴人發(fā)表公訴意見形式化、僵硬化。 第四部分是完善公訴意見書的建議。一是公訴意見書訴訟功能的回歸。理論上對(duì)公訴意見書的錯(cuò)誤定位，實(shí)踐中對(duì)公訴意見書的重視不夠，歸結(jié)起來，就是由于沒有認(rèn)識(shí)到其作用抑或功能。（1）回歸公訴意見書的論證功能，充分發(fā)揮其對(duì)刑事指控的論證。（2）回歸公訴意見書記錄功能，打破現(xiàn)實(shí)中將其作為公訴人發(fā)表公訴意見時(shí)的發(fā)言提綱。二是填補(bǔ)上位法規(guī)定的空白，使公訴意見書的約束對(duì)象明確化。三是規(guī)范公訴意見書的制作審批程序，使其訴訟功能得以發(fā)揮，同時(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)檢察業(yè)務(wù)的規(guī)范化管理。
[Abstract]:A complaint letter of public prosecution is a legal instrument used by a prosecutor in court to support public prosecution in the opening of a public prosecution case on behalf of the people's Procuratorate to publish opinions on the evidence and case in court. It is based on the investigation of the court and is a further demonstration of the alleged offences. The system of trial makes the public prosecutor become more and more important in the stage of court investigation and court debate. How to give full play to the function of public prosecution opinion in criminal proceedings is not only the technical problem of writing and publishing of the documents, but also the effective exercise of the power of public prosecution in the procuratorial organs. The public prosecution of the people's Procuratorate in the C District of Guiyang city has been prosecuted in this paper. The opinion book is investigated and studied, the effect of the operation of the public prosecution opinion book in practice, the existing problems, and the reasons for its problems are analyzed, and the countermeasures are put forward in order to benefit the judicial practice.
In addition to the preface and concluding remarks, the text is divided into four parts, with a total of over 1.6 words.
The first part is the purpose and method of the investigation. Before the reform of the procuratorial legal documents, the public prosecution opinion book has been incorporated into the internal work documents of the procuratorial organs. After 2002, the public prosecution opinion book is stipulated as the legal document. After ten years, the formatting of the public prosecution opinion and the state of its standardized management and transportation is the purpose of the investigation. A case study and an observation visit were adopted.
The second part is the problems existing in the public prosecution opinion book in practice. According to the investigation and the needs of the problem classification, this part divides the problems in the public prosecution opinion into four parts. First, the existing problems in the form are: (1) the format of the public prosecution opinion book is irregular, and the high inspection institute is not strictly complying with the public prosecution. Standard of form of opinion book. (2) improper reference to the legal basis of court and supervision. (3) incorrect introduction to the subject. Secondly, it is not correct. Secondly, there are problems in content: (1) insufficient proof of evidence, in addition to the proof of the court, the prosecutor should also explain the deduction process of the evidence to the facts of the case. (2) the public prosecution is too simple and is flowing. The form has not reached the focus of the debate on the litigation points. (3) the application of the law is rigid and extensive. Again it is the problems in the operation process: (1) the public prosecutor makes public prosecution opinions at random and has no strict standard production procedures. (2) the lack of approval procedures for public prosecution, which leads to its production, examination and approval and error correction. The procedural confusion. Finally, there are problems in the subjective cognition of the public prosecutor. (1) the public prosecutor's cognition of public prosecution opinion is vague and the necessity of filing public prosecution opinions is questioned. (2) not enough attention to the public prosecution opinion book.
The third part is to analyze the reasons for the problems in the practice of public prosecution. One is the mistake orientation of the public prosecution opinion book, which is limited to the public prosecution speech at the beginning of the court debate and the incomplete content of the public prosecution opinion book. Two is the defect of the procedure design of the public prosecution opinion book, which causes the nature of the document. Three is the deficiency of the court, the procuratorate has not paid enough attention to the public prosecution opinion book, and lacks the system and the incentive measures to promote and guarantee the public prosecution opinions to play its litigation value, which makes the quality of the public prosecution opinion in practice a bad quality. Four is the contradiction between the prefabrication of the public prosecution opinion and the uncertainty of the court trial, resulting in some public prosecution opinions and public prosecutors. Public statements in court are inconsistent, or some public prosecutors with inadequate capacity are formalized and rigid.
The fourth part is the suggestion of perfecting the public prosecution opinion book. First, the return of the litigation function of public prosecution opinion book. The wrong orientation of the public prosecution opinion book in theory, the lack of attention to the public prosecution opinion book in practice, is due to the lack of recognition of its function or function. (1) return to the public prosecution opinion book's demonstration function and give full play to its punishment. The argument of the accusation of the matter. (2) return to the recording function of the public prosecution opinion book, break the outline of the speech when the public prosecutor will publish the public prosecution opinion. Two is to fill the blank of the provisions of the upper law, make the object of the public prosecution opinion clear. Three is the procedure for the approval of the standard public prosecution opinion book. The standardized management of the present procuratorial business.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 馮永峰;蔣珊珊;;如何增強(qiáng)公訴意見的說理性和感染力[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年32期

2 李彥林;;分析公訴文書中的問題[J];黑龍江科技信息;2007年18期

3 趙學(xué)武;公訴意見書淺探[J];人民檢察;2000年09期

4 曾范敬;;中美刑事審判程序中公訴意見書與控方陳述的語言比較分析[J];人民檢察;2009年13期

5 吳朝貴;;公訴詞能否超越起訴書指控內(nèi)容構(gòu)成新的指控[J];人民檢察;2007年02期

6 劉漢民;試 論 公 訴 詞 的 語 言 特 色[J];政法論叢;1994年04期

7 陽述周;淺議公訴詞的撰寫技法[J];政法論叢;1996年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 周宏;刑事起訴書制度研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年

本文編號(hào)：1853133