發(fā)布時間：2018-05-14 22:36

  本文選題：反家庭暴力法 + 強(qiáng)制報告制度　； 參考：《廣州大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：家庭暴力是一個古老又現(xiàn)實的話題。我國反家庭暴力法問題研究這一命題,在概述其研究背景內(nèi)容及預(yù)期目的前提下,梳理了我國家庭暴力概念空白期、立法起步期、迅速發(fā)展期及深入發(fā)展期,以及我國《反家庭暴力法》出臺前與出臺后的研究成果等立法史與學(xué)術(shù)史。針對我國《反家庭暴力法》中最核心的四種制度從基本理論,立法與司法缺陷,域外法的分析及啟示,完善立法與司法問題的建議進(jìn)行了系統(tǒng)研究。一是反家暴法中的強(qiáng)制報告制度,立法上存在報告義務(wù)主體范圍過窄、報告方式不明確,相應(yīng)的鼓勵措施與調(diào)查程序未規(guī)定等問題;司法上存在司法機(jī)關(guān)對該制度認(rèn)識不足等問題;分析比較美國、澳大利亞、日本與我國強(qiáng)制報告制度的基礎(chǔ)上,借鑒外國法中有益的做法,提出立法上應(yīng)擴(kuò)大強(qiáng)制報告的義務(wù)主體、拓寬報告方式,建立鼓勵制度,明確調(diào)查程序;司法上,應(yīng)增強(qiáng)司法機(jī)關(guān)對強(qiáng)制報告制度的認(rèn)識等完善建議。二是反家暴法中的告誡制度,立法上存在告誡書適用情形缺乏細(xì)化與統(tǒng)一的實施程序,無法律后果規(guī)定等問題;司法上,存在對告誡書特定組織與機(jī)構(gòu)查訪監(jiān)督不力,地方實施不統(tǒng)一及制度設(shè)計的二選一,懲罰力度不夠致使實施效果欠佳等問題。提出立法上細(xì)化告誡書適用情形、明確告誡書實施程序及法律后果;司法上,政府購買社會組織服務(wù)并進(jìn)行定期回訪,制定告誡制度實施細(xì)則和操作流程,告誡書納入公安犯罪系統(tǒng)和就業(yè)婚姻征信系統(tǒng)等完善建議。三是反家暴法中的庇護(hù)制度,立法上存在申請臨時庇護(hù)缺少具體的操作流程,對符合申請庇護(hù)條件的人審核問題,鄉(xiāng)鎮(zhèn)沒有規(guī)定庇護(hù)所的缺陷等問題;司法上,存在拒絕入住庇護(hù)所的法律監(jiān)督、法律援助保護(hù)的對象缺陷等問題。分析比較瑞典、加拿大、美國與我國庇護(hù)制度的基礎(chǔ)上,借鑒外國法中有益的做法,提出立法上細(xì)化規(guī)范救助庇護(hù)流程、職能部門均應(yīng)設(shè)立庇護(hù)所、建立反家庭暴力委員會;司法上,社會工作考量細(xì)則丞待出臺、庇護(hù)所應(yīng)當(dāng)免費提供法律服務(wù)等等完善建議。四是反家暴法中的人身安全保護(hù)制度,立法上存在檢察院和法院職權(quán)受限制,禁止內(nèi)容過窄和“其他措施”規(guī)定籠統(tǒng),缺少違反保護(hù)令的民事責(zé)任及處罰過輕,適格的被申請人范圍未明確規(guī)定等問題;司法上存在家庭暴力認(rèn)定與否可能導(dǎo)致不予立案或簽發(fā),受害者缺乏取證意識和方法導(dǎo)致舉證困難,夫妻財產(chǎn)共有制下罰款等問題。分析比較英國、美國與我國人身安全保護(hù)制度的基礎(chǔ)上,借鑒外國法中有益的做法,提出立法上擴(kuò)大檢察院和法院的職權(quán),增加人身安全保護(hù)令禁止內(nèi)容的規(guī)定,增加民事責(zé)任規(guī)定和加大人身安全保護(hù)令的處罰力度,拓寬“家庭成員”和被申請人范圍;司法上,采取粗放型認(rèn)定家庭暴力,增強(qiáng)證據(jù)意識及采用優(yōu)勢證據(jù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn),傾斜照顧受害人和建立夫妻財產(chǎn)分離制等完善建議。
[Abstract]:Domestic violence is an old and realistic topic. On the premise of summarizing the research background and the expected purpose, this thesis combs the blank period of the concept of domestic violence, the initial period of legislation, the period of rapid development and the period of deep development. And the history of legislation and academic history before and after the introduction of the domestic violence Law in China. This paper makes a systematic study on the four core systems in the Anti-domestic violence Law in China, including the basic theory, legislative and judicial defects, the analysis and enlightenment of extraterritorial laws, and the suggestions for perfecting legislation and judicature. The first is the compulsory reporting system in the Anti-domestic violence Law. In legislation, the scope of the subject of the reporting obligation is too narrow, the way of reporting is not clear, and the corresponding incentives and investigation procedures are not stipulated. On the basis of analyzing and comparing the compulsory reporting system of the United States, Australia, Japan and China, the author draws lessons from the beneficial practices in foreign law. In legislation, we should expand the subject of compulsory reporting, broaden the reporting methods, establish an encouraging system, and clarify the investigation procedure, and in the judicial field, we should strengthen the judicial organs' understanding of the compulsory reporting system and so on. Second, the admonition system in the anti-domestic violence law, the lack of detailed and unified implementation procedures for the application of the admonition in legislation, the lack of legal consequences, and the lack of judicial supervision over visits to specific organizations and institutions. The local implementation is not uniform and the system is designed from one of the two, the punishment is not enough, resulting in poor implementation effect. Proposing legislation to refine the application of the letter of caution, making clear the procedures and legal consequences of the implementation of the letter of caution; judicially, the government buys the services of social organizations and carries out regular visits, and formulates the detailed rules and procedures for the implementation of the warning system, The letter of caution includes the public security crime system and employment marriage credit system and other perfect suggestions. Third, the asylum system in the anti-domestic violence law. In legislation, there are problems such as the lack of specific procedures for applying for temporary asylum, the examination of persons who meet the requirements for asylum, the lack of provision of shelter in towns and townships, and so on. There are some problems, such as the legal supervision of refusing to stay in the shelter, the defects of the object of legal aid protection and so on. On the basis of analyzing and comparing the asylum system of Sweden, Canada, the United States and our country, and drawing lessons from the beneficial practices in foreign law, the author puts forward that the legislation should refine and standardize the asylum relief process, and the functional departments should set up shelters and establish the Committee against domestic violence; Judicial, social work rules to be issued, shelters should provide free legal services and other suggestions. Fourth, the system of personal protection in the law on domestic violence. In legislation, the powers of procuratorates and courts are restricted, the prohibition is too narrow and the provisions of "other measures" are general, and there is a lack of civil liability for breaching protection orders and the punishment is too light. The scope of the eligible respondent is not clearly defined; the judicial existence of domestic violence may lead to the non-filing or issuance, the lack of awareness and methods of the victim to obtain evidence leads to the difficulty of proof, the husband and wife property system under the system of fines and other issues. On the basis of analyzing and comparing the system of personal security protection in Britain, the United States and China, and drawing lessons from the beneficial practices in foreign law, the author proposes that the powers of procuratorates and courts should be expanded in legislation, and the provisions of prohibiting contents of personal security protection orders should be added. To increase the provisions of civil liability and the punishment of personal security protection orders, to broaden the scope of "family members" and the respondent, to adopt extensive identification of domestic violence in the judicial field, to enhance the awareness of evidence and to adopt superior evidence standards, We should take care of the victims and establish the separation system of husband and wife property.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D923.9

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊志超;;比較法視角下兒童保護(hù)強(qiáng)制報告制度特征探析[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2017年01期

2 湯軼群;;論我國人身安全保護(hù)令制度的完善[J];白城師范學(xué)院學(xué)報;2016年10期

3 黃炎;;國際人權(quán)法視角下我國反家庭暴力的立法與實踐[J];青少年犯罪問題;2016年04期

4 陳敏;;人身安全保護(hù)令實施現(xiàn)狀、挑戰(zhàn)及其解決[J];預(yù)防青少年犯罪研究;2016年03期

5 李秀華;;兒童家庭暴力干預(yù)模式構(gòu)想[J];中華女子學(xué)院學(xué)報;2016年03期

6 王世洲;;現(xiàn)代英國反對家庭暴力的主要法律制度研究[J];法學(xué)雜志;2016年01期

7 鄭凌燕;;國外反家庭暴力立法一覽[J];人民政壇;2015年11期

8 李春斌;;英美法系典型國家涉家庭暴力立法考察[J];沈陽大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2015年03期

9 王啟梁;;法律新范式:通過法制建設(shè)社會——臺灣家庭暴力防治立法的文本與體系分析[J];思想戰(zhàn)線;2015年03期

10 馮俊偉;;論促進(jìn)家庭暴力認(rèn)定的證據(jù)機(jī)制——以訴訟行為的激勵作用為視角[J];法學(xué)雜志;2015年05期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前4條

1 王春霞;;反家暴，合力正在形成[N];中國婦女報;2016年

2 郝紹彬;;讓強(qiáng)制報告制度為兒童撐起保護(hù)傘[N];人民法院報;2016年

3 周，

本文編號：1889796