本文關(guān)鍵詞： 羈押 職權(quán)配置 司法權(quán)　出處：《上海交通大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：本文嘗試從職權(quán)合理配置的角度入手分析我國羈押制度的弊病和改革路徑。我國的羈押制度目前存在諸多問題，主要表現(xiàn)在羈押的審查、羈押期限的延長、羈押場所的管理以及羈押的救濟等方面。晚清和民國時期我國曾引入過近代意義上的羈押制度，，但該制度于新中國建立后被廢棄。制度上的空白與歷史文化傳統(tǒng)的共同因素造成了我國羈押制度目前的局面。 參考關(guān)于羈押制度的主流觀點和國外的一些共通做法可以發(fā)現(xiàn)，西方國家較為成熟的羈押制度都是以司法權(quán)為核心來配置職權(quán)的，并在原則上傾向于保障犯罪嫌疑人和被告人的權(quán)益，將羈押作為一種“最后的手段”。因此，有許多研究都認為我國的羈押制度也應(yīng)當(dāng)圍繞司法權(quán)來構(gòu)建。 以司法權(quán)為核心來配置羈押制度的各項職權(quán)總體上來說是合理的，司法權(quán)的中立性有利于維護犯罪嫌疑人和被告人的權(quán)益。但通過進一步分析就能發(fā)現(xiàn)，司法權(quán)在羈押制度中的作用也存在短板。由于司法權(quán)以一種二元體系為判斷標準，使其在一些條件模糊的情況下具有不充分性。在羈押制度中，這種不充分性主要表現(xiàn)在對羈押審查時的危險性預(yù)測上。因此，以圍繞司法權(quán)構(gòu)建的羈押制度在優(yōu)化職權(quán)配置時需要進一步拆分權(quán)力，并將利益權(quán)衡作為司法權(quán)二元判斷的補充。 在上述分析的基礎(chǔ)上，本文最后也從職權(quán)配置優(yōu)化的角度對羈押制度的改革提出了一些看法。由于考慮到我國羈押制度與國外成熟的制度相比有較大差距，因此在對其進行改造時應(yīng)當(dāng)循序漸進。本文將我國羈押制度的改革分成了兩個階段：第一階段是圍繞司法權(quán)來配置羈押制度的各項職權(quán)，這一步主要為了解決我國羈押現(xiàn)狀中的一些突出問題，如自偵自羈、超期羈押等。此外，本文還認為應(yīng)當(dāng)將司法行政機關(guān)引入羈押制度中承擔(dān)羈押場所的管理職能。第二階段是在第一階段的基礎(chǔ)上進一步對我國羈押制度職權(quán)配置進行優(yōu)化，主要目標是拆分羈押的司法審查權(quán)，由公安機關(guān)、司法行政部門及社會民眾等多個主體參與到審查程序中來，降低司法權(quán)的二元判斷比例，通過利益權(quán)衡的方法追求羈押審查的合理化。同時對我國的取保候?qū)徶贫冗M行改造，使其成為一個接近國外保釋制度的羈押救濟制度。
[Abstract]:This paper tries to analyze the maladies and reform paths of our country's custody system from the angle of rational allocation of power. There are many problems in our country's custody system, mainly in the examination of custody and the extension of detention period. In the late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China, the custody system in the modern sense was introduced. However, the system was abandoned after the establishment of New China. The gap in the system and the common factors of historical, cultural and traditional causes the present situation of the detention system in China. Referring to the mainstream view on the detention system and some common practices abroad, we can find that the more mature custody system in western countries is the judicial power as the core to allocate the functions and powers. In principle, we tend to protect the rights and interests of criminal suspects and defendants, and take custody as a "last resort". Therefore, many studies believe that the custody system of our country should also be built around judicial power. Judicial power as the core of the allocation of custody system is generally reasonable, the neutrality of judicial power is conducive to the protection of the rights and interests of criminal suspects and defendants, but through further analysis can be found. The role of judicial power in the custody system also has shortcomings. Because the judicial power is based on a dualistic system, it is not sufficient in some fuzzy conditions. Such inadequacies are mainly manifested in the risk prediction of custody review. Therefore, the custody system built around judicial power needs to split the power further when it optimizes the allocation of functions and powers. The balance of interests is taken as a supplement to the dualistic judgment of judicial power. On the basis of the above analysis, this paper also puts forward some views on the reform of custody system from the perspective of optimizing the allocation of powers. Considering that there is a big gap between China's detention system and foreign mature system. The reform of the detention system in China is divided into two stages: the first stage is to allocate the powers and powers of the detention system around the judicial power. The main purpose of this step is to solve some outstanding problems in the present situation of detention in our country, such as self-detection, extended detention and so on. This article also believes that the judicial administrative organs should be introduced into the custody system to assume the management function of the detention place. The second stage is to further optimize the allocation of the power of custody system on the basis of the first stage. The main goal is to split custody of judicial review power, by the public security organs, judicial administration departments and the public and other subjects to participate in the review process to reduce the proportion of judicial power of dual judgment. The rationalization of custody review is pursued through the method of balancing interests, and the system of bail awaiting trial in our country is reformed to make it a relief system of custody close to that of foreign bail system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海交通大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 夏錦文,徐英榮;刑事羈押期限:立法的缺陷及其救濟[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2005年01期

2 熊秋紅;;刑事司法職權(quán)的合理配置[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2009年01期

3 石經(jīng)海;;我國羈押制度的法文化考察[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報);2008年03期

4 卞建林;;論我國審前羈押制度的完善[J];法學(xué)家;2012年03期

5 蔣石平;;論我國刑事程序的“行政化”傾向——以未決羈押制度為視角[J];法學(xué)評論;2008年04期

6 周偉;保釋解讀與我國取保候?qū)徶贫雀母颷J];法學(xué);2004年12期

7 李麒;;刑事司法職權(quán)配置的思考[J];法學(xué)雜志;2011年08期

8 熊江寧;對審前羈押的司法控制問題的研究[J];河北法學(xué);2001年04期

9 白淑卿,胡子君;關(guān)于建立我國羈押候?qū)徶贫鹊姆蓸?gòu)想——從我國的超期羈押清理談起[J];河北法學(xué);2004年05期

10 袁勁秋;論現(xiàn)代審前羈押制度遵循的普遍原則[J];河北法學(xué);2005年03期

本文編號：1479120