【摘要】：“9·11”事件之后,前任美國總統(tǒng)布什授權(quán)中情局采用引渡的非常規(guī)替代措施用以緝拿恐怖分子,這類措施可以繞過引渡合作的法律障礙從境外將疑犯緝拿歸案,卻會(huì)有損相關(guān)國家的主權(quán),侵犯相關(guān)當(dāng)事人的基本人權(quán)。本文采用案例與理論,分析與綜合的方法,對(duì)引渡的非常規(guī)替代措施進(jìn)行批評(píng)。 首先,從非常規(guī)替代措施的具體表現(xiàn)形式及相關(guān)案例出發(fā),對(duì)非常規(guī)替代措施進(jìn)行辯駁,指出非常規(guī)替代措施違反了引渡一般原則中有關(guān)雙重犯罪原則以及或起訴或引渡原則之規(guī)定。非常規(guī)替代措施缺乏正當(dāng)性基礎(chǔ),不僅侵犯他國國家司法主權(quán),更侵犯了他國公民的基本人權(quán)。其次,以“美國特工釣魚執(zhí)法案”為例,從程序正義和實(shí)體正義兩個(gè)角度對(duì)非常規(guī)替代措施進(jìn)行批判,指出非常規(guī)替代措施違背司法正義之精神。最后,針對(duì)非常規(guī)替代措施,本文指出國家和政府應(yīng)當(dāng)主張限制該措施的使用,主張始終堅(jiān)持無罪推定原則,進(jìn)行實(shí)質(zhì)性的人權(quán)保護(hù),并對(duì)被判刑人移管制度加以靈活運(yùn)用,最大限度保護(hù)我國公民。此外,建議主管機(jī)關(guān)積極推進(jìn)雙邊引渡合作,加強(qiáng)相關(guān)案例的宣傳,提高公民的防范意識(shí)。
[Abstract]:After 9 / 11, former US President George W. Bush authorized the CIA to use unconventional alternatives to extradition to catch terrorists, which could bypass legal barriers to extradition cooperation and bring suspects to justice from outside the country. However, it would impair the sovereignty of the countries concerned and violate the basic human rights of the parties concerned. In this paper, cases and theories, analysis and synthesis methods are used to criticize the unconventional alternative measures of extradition. First of all, from the specific manifestations of unconventional alternative measures and related cases, to refute the non-conventional alternative measures, It is pointed out that unconventional alternative measures violate the provisions of the general principle of extradition concerning the principle of dual criminality and the principle of prosecution or Aut dedere Aut judicare. Unconventional alternative measures lack the legitimate basis, which not only infringes the judicial sovereignty of other countries, but also infringes on the basic human rights of citizens of other countries. Secondly, taking the case of "American Secret Service fishing Enforcement case" as an example, this paper criticizes the unconventional alternative measures from the point of view of procedural justice and substantive justice, and points out that the unconventional alternative measures violate the spirit of judicial justice. Finally, with regard to non-conventional alternative measures, this paper points out that States and governments should advocate limiting the use of such measures, uphold the principle of presumption of innocence, provide substantive human rights protection, and apply the system of transfer of sentenced persons flexibly. Maximize the protection of our citizens. In addition, the competent authorities should actively promote bilateral extradition cooperation, strengthen the publicity of relevant cases, and raise citizens' awareness of prevention.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D998.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 黃風(fēng);;論引渡的非常規(guī)替代措施——由“袁宏偉案”說起[J];法商研究;2008年02期

2 王莉君;;法學(xué)基礎(chǔ)范疇的重構(gòu):對(duì)權(quán)利和權(quán)力的新思考[J];法學(xué)家;2005年02期

3 葉傳星;;人權(quán)概念的理論分歧解析[J];法學(xué)家;2005年06期

4 李英,鄧錦云;論引渡的國際法原則——兼評(píng)《中華人民共和國引渡法》[J];國際關(guān)系學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年04期

5 董云虎;論國際關(guān)系中的人權(quán)與主權(quán)關(guān)系——兼駁“人權(quán)高于主權(quán)”謬論[J];求是;2000年06期

6 齊延平;論普遍人權(quán)[J];法學(xué)論壇;2002年03期

7 劉雅君;引渡與國際法 ──兼論中國引渡法律制度[J];法制與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2000年05期

8 葉江;論“安全困境”與超越“安全困境”——兼論“安全困境”與“中國威脅論”的關(guān)系[J];上海交通大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2004年05期

9 孫春霞;試論主權(quán)與人權(quán)的關(guān)系[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)研究;1999年06期

10 張麗君;;“中國威脅論”:美國對(duì)中國偏見“意象”的生成[J];探索與爭鳴;2011年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 董世聞;“或引渡或起訴”原則研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：2407603