不起訴聽證程序研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-05-10 02:43
【摘要】：不起訴決定直接關(guān)系到案件的訴訟走向和實(shí)體處理。檢察機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)不起訴權(quán)擁有一定的自由裁量權(quán)，若監(jiān)督制約措施不利，極有被濫用的危險(xiǎn)。為了規(guī)范不起訴行為，最高人民檢察院公訴廳在2001年發(fā)布《人民檢察院辦理不起訴案件公開審查規(guī)則（試行）》，要求在全國推行不起訴案件公開審查制度。但是，全面審視后，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)該規(guī)則存在諸多的問題，不可能有效解決現(xiàn)行不起訴制度中存在的問題。本文從聽證程序的核心價(jià)值入手，分析我國現(xiàn)行不起訴決定程序和不起訴案件公開審查制度存在的問題，最后設(shè)計(jì)出具體的不起訴案件聽證程序。本文共分五部分： 第一部分為我國現(xiàn)行不起訴決定程序的解讀。我國現(xiàn)行不起訴決定程序主要分為三個(gè)階段：即審查、受理階段；討論、決定階段和宣布、救濟(jì)階段。 第二部分為我國現(xiàn)行不起訴決定程序存在的問題。筆者首先對(duì)不起訴決定程序做了較為詳細(xì)的解讀，然后重點(diǎn)闡述該程序存在的問題。主要存在著不起訴決定程序缺乏公開與透明、不起訴書缺乏說理以及對(duì)不起訴權(quán)的監(jiān)督制約措施乏力等問題。檢察機(jī)關(guān)嚴(yán)控不起訴率、相對(duì)不起訴和證據(jù)不足不起訴的案件必經(jīng)檢委會(huì)討論的做法，既無視不起訴制度的功能，又架空了《刑事訴訟法》關(guān)于不起訴的法律規(guī)定。 第三部分為我國不起訴決定程序改革的實(shí)踐探索。筆者主要從《人民檢察院辦理不起訴案件公開審查規(guī)則（試行）》和司法實(shí)踐探索兩方面著手，分析其成效和不足之處，為構(gòu)建我國不起訴聽證程序提供借鑒。 第四部分為我國建立不起訴聽證程序的必要性與可行性。不起訴聽證程序一方面有利于雙方當(dāng)事人公開地表達(dá)利益訴求，消除對(duì)檢察機(jī)關(guān)的不滿情緒；另一方面也有利于檢察機(jī)關(guān)在公開透明的場合下最大程度的了解犯罪嫌疑人的自身情況和被害人的要求，綜合考慮起訴的必要性，最終實(shí)現(xiàn)不起訴制度的功能。 第五部分為不起訴聽證程序的具體設(shè)計(jì)。這是本文的重點(diǎn)內(nèi)容。筆者將從基本原則、案件適用范圍、聽證主體、具體程序設(shè)置、聽證決議等方面初步構(gòu)建不起訴聽證程序。當(dāng)事人對(duì)檢察機(jī)關(guān)擬作出“相對(duì)不起訴”或“證據(jù)不起訴”決定有異議，在規(guī)定期間內(nèi)均可提出不起訴聽證申請(qǐng)，檢察機(jī)關(guān)程序性審查后，著手組織聽證會(huì)，，由非案件承辦人且與本案無利害關(guān)系的其他主訴檢察官主持聽證會(huì)，最后根據(jù)聽證決議或參考聽證決議作出最終決定。
[Abstract]:The decision not to sue is directly related to the litigation trend and substantive handling of the case. Procuratorial organs are sorry to have a certain discretion, if supervision and restriction measures are unfavorable, there is a great risk of abuse. In order to regulate the behavior of non-prosecution, the Public Appeal Department of the Supreme people's Procuratorate issued the rules for the Public examination of non-prosecution cases by the people's Procuratorate in 2001, which called for the implementation of the public examination system for non-prosecution cases throughout the country. However, after a comprehensive examination, we find that there are many problems in the rule, and it is impossible to effectively solve the problems existing in the current non-prosecution system. Starting with the core value of the hearing procedure, this paper analyzes the problems existing in the current non-prosecution decision procedure and the public review system of the non-prosecution case in our country, and finally designs the specific hearing procedure of the non-prosecution case. This paper is divided into five parts: the first part is the interpretation of the current non-prosecution decision procedure in our country. The current non-prosecution decision procedure in China is divided into three stages: review, acceptance, discussion, decision and announcement, relief. The second part is the problems existing in the current non-prosecution decision procedure in our country. The author first makes a more detailed interpretation of the non-prosecution decision-making procedure, and then focuses on the existing problems of the procedure. There are mainly some problems, such as the lack of openness and transparency in the procedure of non-prosecution decision, the lack of reasoning in non-prosecution, and the lack of supervision and restriction measures for the right of sorry to sue. The procuratorial organs strictly control the rate of non-prosecution, and the cases of non-prosecution and lack of evidence must be discussed by the prosecution committee, which not only ignores the function of the non-prosecution system, but also overlooks the legal provisions of the Criminal procedure Law on non-prosecution. The third part is the practical exploration of the reform of non-prosecution decision procedure in our country. The author mainly analyzes its effectiveness and shortcomings from two aspects: the rules of Public examination of non-prosecution cases handled by the people's Procuratorate (trial) and the exploration of judicial practice, so as to provide reference for the construction of non-prosecution hearing procedure in our country. The fourth part is the necessity and feasibility of establishing non-prosecution hearing procedure in our country. On the one hand, the non-prosecution hearing procedure is helpful for both parties to openly express their interests and eliminate their dissatisfaction with the procuratorial organs. On the other hand, it is also helpful for procuratorial organs to understand the situation of criminal suspects and the requirements of victims to the greatest extent under the condition of openness and transparency, consider the necessity of prosecution comprehensively, and finally realize the function of non-prosecution system. The fifth part is the specific design of non-prosecution hearing procedure. This is the key content of this paper. The author will initially construct the non-prosecution hearing procedure from the basic principles, the scope of application of the case, the subject of the hearing, the setting of the specific procedure, the resolution of the hearing and so on. The parties concerned object to the decision of the procuratorial organ to make a "relative non-prosecution" or "evidence not to sue" decision, and may apply for a hearing without prosecution within the prescribed period. After procedural examination by the procuratorial organ, the procuratorial organ shall proceed with the organization of the hearing. The hearing shall be presided over by other principal prosecution prosecutors who are not the contractor of the case and have no interest in the case, and the final decision shall be made in accordance with the hearing resolution or the reference hearing resolution.
【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)】：D926.3
本文編號(hào)：2473285
[Abstract]:The decision not to sue is directly related to the litigation trend and substantive handling of the case. Procuratorial organs are sorry to have a certain discretion, if supervision and restriction measures are unfavorable, there is a great risk of abuse. In order to regulate the behavior of non-prosecution, the Public Appeal Department of the Supreme people's Procuratorate issued the rules for the Public examination of non-prosecution cases by the people's Procuratorate in 2001, which called for the implementation of the public examination system for non-prosecution cases throughout the country. However, after a comprehensive examination, we find that there are many problems in the rule, and it is impossible to effectively solve the problems existing in the current non-prosecution system. Starting with the core value of the hearing procedure, this paper analyzes the problems existing in the current non-prosecution decision procedure and the public review system of the non-prosecution case in our country, and finally designs the specific hearing procedure of the non-prosecution case. This paper is divided into five parts: the first part is the interpretation of the current non-prosecution decision procedure in our country. The current non-prosecution decision procedure in China is divided into three stages: review, acceptance, discussion, decision and announcement, relief. The second part is the problems existing in the current non-prosecution decision procedure in our country. The author first makes a more detailed interpretation of the non-prosecution decision-making procedure, and then focuses on the existing problems of the procedure. There are mainly some problems, such as the lack of openness and transparency in the procedure of non-prosecution decision, the lack of reasoning in non-prosecution, and the lack of supervision and restriction measures for the right of sorry to sue. The procuratorial organs strictly control the rate of non-prosecution, and the cases of non-prosecution and lack of evidence must be discussed by the prosecution committee, which not only ignores the function of the non-prosecution system, but also overlooks the legal provisions of the Criminal procedure Law on non-prosecution. The third part is the practical exploration of the reform of non-prosecution decision procedure in our country. The author mainly analyzes its effectiveness and shortcomings from two aspects: the rules of Public examination of non-prosecution cases handled by the people's Procuratorate (trial) and the exploration of judicial practice, so as to provide reference for the construction of non-prosecution hearing procedure in our country. The fourth part is the necessity and feasibility of establishing non-prosecution hearing procedure in our country. On the one hand, the non-prosecution hearing procedure is helpful for both parties to openly express their interests and eliminate their dissatisfaction with the procuratorial organs. On the other hand, it is also helpful for procuratorial organs to understand the situation of criminal suspects and the requirements of victims to the greatest extent under the condition of openness and transparency, consider the necessity of prosecution comprehensively, and finally realize the function of non-prosecution system. The fifth part is the specific design of non-prosecution hearing procedure. This is the key content of this paper. The author will initially construct the non-prosecution hearing procedure from the basic principles, the scope of application of the case, the subject of the hearing, the setting of the specific procedure, the resolution of the hearing and so on. The parties concerned object to the decision of the procuratorial organ to make a "relative non-prosecution" or "evidence not to sue" decision, and may apply for a hearing without prosecution within the prescribed period. After procedural examination by the procuratorial organ, the procuratorial organ shall proceed with the organization of the hearing. The hearing shall be presided over by other principal prosecution prosecutors who are not the contractor of the case and have no interest in the case, and the final decision shall be made in accordance with the hearing resolution or the reference hearing resolution.
【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)】：D926.3
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 汪建成;姜遠(yuǎn)亮;;寬嚴(yán)相濟(jì)刑事政策與刑事起訴制度[J];東方法學(xué);2008年06期
2 樊崇義;李嵐;;“刑事起訴與不起訴”制度研究觀點(diǎn)綜述[J];法學(xué)雜志;2006年03期
3 左德起;鄭慧;;試論檢委會(huì)決定書的公開化——以基層人民檢察院為視角[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2011年02期
4 涂學(xué)華;周靜;;論不起訴決定書的說理改革[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年03期
5 葉青;陳海鋒;;中國法學(xué)會(huì)刑事訴訟法學(xué)研究會(huì)2010年年會(huì)綜述[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期
6 蘇玉華,楊善良;審查起訴模式改革初探[J];檢察實(shí)踐;1999年04期
7 麻立志;;不起訴案件聽證探討[J];中國檢察官;2006年01期
8 林步東;;擴(kuò)大人民監(jiān)督員監(jiān)督范圍之實(shí)證研究 基于江蘇省常熟市檢察院試行“3+2”人民監(jiān)督員監(jiān)督模式之實(shí)踐[J];中國檢察官;2009年09期
9 楊海坤;關(guān)于行政聽證制度若干問題的研討[J];江蘇社會(huì)科學(xué);1998年01期
10 湯堯;;司法聽證與刑事訴訟構(gòu)造之匡正——以不起訴聽證為切入點(diǎn)的考量[J];金陵法律評(píng)論;2007年02期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 劉蘭秋;刑事不起訴制度研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2006年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條
1 劉愛民;刑事起訴政策問題研究[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2004年
2 呂文祺;論不起訴聽證程序[D];西南政法大學(xué);2006年
3 戚俊;不起訴聽證制度研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2007年
4 李忠;論檢察機(jī)關(guān)起訴裁量權(quán)[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年
5 吳仕春;論不起訴監(jiān)督機(jī)制[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年
6 張鵬;論我國聽證制度的完善[D];西南政法大學(xué);2008年
7 謝玲;審查起訴方式的改革與完善[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年
本文編號(hào)：2473285
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/gongjianfalunwen/2473285.html
最近更新
教材專著
