本文選題：國際刑事法院 + 檢察官　； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：國際刑事法院檢察官啟動(dòng)調(diào)查程序標(biāo)志著國際刑事法院訴訟程序的開始,因此,國際刑事法院檢察官在每一起案件或情勢(shì)中都會(huì)受到各方的特別關(guān)注。根據(jù)《國際刑事法院規(guī)約》的相關(guān)規(guī)定,國際刑事法院檢察官可以基于三種原因(聯(lián)合國安理會(huì)提交情勢(shì)、締約國提交情勢(shì)、檢察官自行提起調(diào)查)啟動(dòng)調(diào)查程序,但前提是必須遵循相應(yīng)的原則和符合相應(yīng)的條件,因此檢察官啟動(dòng)調(diào)查程序不是隨意的。調(diào)查程序一旦啟動(dòng),檢察官在行使調(diào)查權(quán)時(shí)就有從速和公正調(diào)查的義務(wù)。檢察官可以采取一般的調(diào)查措施,如收集和保全證據(jù),也可以依據(jù)相關(guān)規(guī)定要求有關(guān)國家給予刑事司法合作,還可以基于締約國的同意而在一國直接展開調(diào)查。由于國際刑事法院檢察官行使調(diào)查權(quán)所帶來的不利后果以及其在國際社會(huì)的影響力,使得國際社會(huì)的不同利益團(tuán)體對(duì)其產(chǎn)生了抵觸,在行使調(diào)查權(quán)時(shí),不可避免的會(huì)發(fā)生不同利害關(guān)系主體之間的權(quán)力和利益沖突,如檢察官調(diào)查權(quán)與國家主權(quán)的沖突,檢察官調(diào)查權(quán)與國際政治的沖突,檢察官調(diào)查權(quán)與聯(lián)合國安理會(huì)職權(quán)的沖突,檢察官調(diào)查權(quán)與法官審查權(quán)的沖突等。這些沖突是我們研究檢察官調(diào)查權(quán)不可忽視的問題,尤其是對(duì)檢察官行使自行調(diào)查權(quán)將產(chǎn)生很大的影響。這些沖突能否合理的化解,關(guān)系著檢察官是否能客觀、公正的行使調(diào)查權(quán)以實(shí)現(xiàn)懲治國際社會(huì)上最重犯罪這一目的。 目前國際社會(huì)對(duì)檢察官自行調(diào)查權(quán)的設(shè)立仍是各執(zhí)一詞。1998年6月15日,在聯(lián)合國建立國際刑事法院全權(quán)代表外交大會(huì)上,中國代表團(tuán)就認(rèn)為《國際刑事法院規(guī)約》關(guān)于檢察官自行調(diào)查權(quán)的規(guī)定,實(shí)際上使得檢察官的權(quán)力過大,檢察官依據(jù)個(gè)人提供的情報(bào),就可以開始調(diào)查程序,這在一定程度上能夠直接影響或干擾國家的司法主權(quán),這也成為我國拒絕加入《國際刑事法院規(guī)約》的原因之一。我們?cè)趽?dān)心檢察官行使自行調(diào)查權(quán)時(shí)會(huì)濫用權(quán)力、侵犯國家主權(quán)、損害法院公正與獨(dú)立的同時(shí),也不得不肯定確立檢察官自行調(diào)查權(quán)對(duì)國際刑法所產(chǎn)生的積極影響。不可否認(rèn)的是這一制度的確立是人類社會(huì)在實(shí)現(xiàn)普遍正義這一法律理想的道路上邁出的重要一步。 本文以《國際刑事法院規(guī)約》中的相關(guān)規(guī)定為依據(jù),對(duì)檢察官在國際刑事法院的地位、作用,檢察官辦公室的設(shè)置,檢察官行使調(diào)查權(quán)遵循的原則、以及在行使權(quán)力時(shí)采取的措施做了簡單的概述,并結(jié)合案例對(duì)三種啟動(dòng)調(diào)查的方式分別作了評(píng)述,尤其對(duì)檢察官自行調(diào)查權(quán)的設(shè)置背景、檢察官行使自行調(diào)查權(quán)時(shí)受到的制約、以及檢察官行使自行調(diào)查權(quán)存在的問題進(jìn)行比較細(xì)致的論述。本文對(duì)《國際刑事法院規(guī)約》關(guān)于檢察官自行提起調(diào)查的規(guī)定給予肯定,并認(rèn)為建立一個(gè)強(qiáng)有力的國際刑事司法機(jī)構(gòu),既有利于懲治國際社會(huì)“最嚴(yán)重的犯罪”,也符合國際社會(huì)的現(xiàn)實(shí)需要。同時(shí)認(rèn)為我國應(yīng)當(dāng)主動(dòng)加入《國際刑事法院規(guī)約》,積極參與《國際刑事法院規(guī)約》的修訂,并在國際刑事法院的各個(gè)方面發(fā)揮其大國應(yīng)有的影響力,以維護(hù)我國的合法利益,而不應(yīng)該成為一個(gè)局外的反對(duì)者。
[Abstract]:The initiation of the investigation procedure by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court marks the beginning of the proceedings of the International Criminal Court. Therefore, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court will be given special attention in every case or situation. According to the regulations of the International Criminal Court, the prosecutor of the ICC may be based on three reasons. The State Security Council submits the situation, the state party submits the situation, the prosecutor brings up the investigation by itself, and starts the investigation procedure, but the premise is to follow the corresponding principles and conform to the corresponding conditions. Therefore, the prosecutor starts the investigation procedure. As soon as the investigation procedure is started, the prosecutor has the duty of speeding and impartial investigation in the exercise of the investigative power. The prosecutor may take general investigative measures, such as collecting and preserving evidence, and may also require relevant States to cooperate in Criminal Justice on the basis of relevant provisions, and can also conduct a direct investigation in a country based on the consent of the State Party. The adverse consequences of the exercise of the right of investigation by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court and its presence in the international community are also possible. The influence of the different interests of the international community is incompatible with them. In the exercise of the power of investigation, the conflict of power and interests between the different stakeholders will inevitably occur, such as the conflict between the prosecutor's investigation power and the state sovereignty, the conflict between the prosecutor's investigation power and the interstate politics, the prosecutor's investigation right and the United State security. The conflict is the conflict of the power of the procurator and the conflict of the judge's right of examination. These conflicts are the problems that we can not ignore, especially for the prosecutor to exercise the right of self-investigation. Whether the conflict can be resolved reasonably and whether the prosecutor can exercise the right of investigation objectively and impartially. In order to achieve the goal of punishing the most serious crimes in the international community.
At present, the establishment of the right of self-investigation of the prosecutor in the international community is still a separate word for the June 15th.1998. At the United Nations establishment of an international criminal court plenipotentiary diplomatic conference, the Chinese Delegation believed that the provisions of the statute of the International Criminal Court on the right to investigate the prosecutor's own right of investigation made the prosecutor's power too large and the prosecutor's basis The information provided by the individual can start the investigation procedure, which can directly affect or interfere with the state's judicial sovereignty to some extent, which is one of the reasons for our refusal to join the statute of the International Criminal Court. We are worried that the prosecutor will abuse power, infringe state sovereignty, and impair justice and independence of the court when the prosecutor exercises its own self-investigation power. At the same time, it must be affirmative to establish the positive influence of the prosecutor's self-investigation right on the international criminal law. It is undeniable that the establishment of this system is an important step on the road of human society to realize the legal ideal of universal justice.
On the basis of the relevant provisions of the statute of the International Criminal Court, this paper gives a brief overview of the status and role of the prosecutor in the International Criminal Court, the establishment of the office of the prosecutor, the principles followed by the prosecutor in exercising the right to investigate, and the measures taken in exercising power, and the three ways of starting the investigation in combination with the case. In particular, the background of the right to investigate the prosecutor, the restriction of the prosecutor's exercise of its own power of investigation, and the problem of the procurator's exercise of the right of self-investigation are discussed in detail. This article affirms the provisions of the statute of the International Criminal Court on the procurator's own investigation and the establishment of a strong point. The powerful international criminal judiciary is not only conducive to the punishment of the "most serious crimes" in the international community, but also in accordance with the practical needs of the international community. At the same time, it is believed that China should actively join the statute of the International Criminal Court, actively participate in the revision of the statute of the International Criminal Court, and give full play to its great powers in all aspects of the International Criminal Court. In order to safeguard our legitimate interests, we should not be an outsider.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D997.9

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 劉曉菲;論國際刑事法院檢察官的獨(dú)立性[D];外交學(xué)院;2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1936378