發(fā)布時間：2018-03-04 11:43

  本文選題：刑事訴訟　切入點：庭前會議　出處：《安徽大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：2012年我國首次將刑事庭前會議制度這一全新規(guī)定正式寫入《刑事訴訟法》中。設(shè)立刑事庭前會議這一制度,其目的就是提升司法審判的效率,維護公平和解決爭議,作為準備程序的核心,實施三年來有效的增強了控辯審三方在訴訟中的參與程度。同時,由于我國的庭前會議制度才剛剛建立一個雛形,相關(guān)配套的法律和司法解釋還較為抽象,其功能與作用在實踐中尚無法得到完全發(fā)揮。刑事庭前會議制度在實踐中已運行三年,出現(xiàn)了不少經(jīng)典案例。筆者結(jié)合新《刑事訴訟法》和最高法司法解釋,通過采用案例說明、數(shù)據(jù)比較研究等方法,深入剖析現(xiàn)階段庭前會議制度啟動程序不規(guī)范、適用范圍不明確、參加人員規(guī)定寬泛、具體內(nèi)容不細致、法律效力有待增強等司法現(xiàn)狀。伴隨著世界各國司法文明的程度越來越高,人權(quán)保護這一問題也愈發(fā)被廣泛重視起來,庭前會議以及與此類似的程序已在世界各國不斷設(shè)立和完善。無疑,各國將庭前會議制度納入本國的刑事訴訟法中已是不可阻擋的趨勢。然而,鑒于具體國情、政治背景、歷史文化、民族風(fēng)俗等的影響,每個國家對刑事庭前會議的規(guī)定又各不相同。但是總體上說,庭前會議制度的目的主要是輔助庭審程序以及充分保證相對弱勢的辯方的權(quán)利。就庭前會議的而言,既存在將該程序規(guī)定為強制的必經(jīng)的程序如英國,也存在依職權(quán)和依申請啟動并存的方式如美國。每個國家庭前會議的效力各不相同,即在庭前會議上解決的問題的協(xié)商結(jié)果在其后的法庭審判中所起到的作用和意義不同,如美國的庭前會議記錄就要由與會人員簽字發(fā)生效力,俄羅斯可以利用庭前會議決定開庭和終止訴訟等事項。庭前會議制度不僅是庭前準備程序必不可少的部分,也是一個相對獨立的刑事訴訟階段,其與庭前準備、預(yù)審程序等概念相似但又有著不同的價值和功能。庭前會議具有程序和實體兩大功能,完善我國的庭前會議制度將大大提高刑事訴訟的效率、維護司法的公正、切實保障當(dāng)事人的人權(quán)。如何完善中國刑事訴訟中的庭前會議制度是文章的重點著墨之處。筆者從庭前會議的啟動、庭前會議主持人員、庭前會議的內(nèi)容、法律效力等方面進行分析。從司法理念的角度來講,庭前會議程序以協(xié)調(diào)訴訟效率和公平正義、保護當(dāng)事人權(quán)利為出發(fā)點處理實體性問題與程序性問題的關(guān)系；從具體的程序設(shè)計角度來講,規(guī)范庭前會議的啟動程序、劃定庭前會議的適用范圍、明確庭前會議的參加人員、細化庭前會議的內(nèi)容、增強庭前會議的法律效力,建立中國特色的證據(jù)展示與保全制度。進一步完善我國的刑事庭前會議制度不僅是以“審判為中心”的訴訟制度改革的必然要求,更是新《刑事訴訟法》頒布后需要重點解決的司法實踐問題。
[Abstract]:In 2012, for the first time in China, the new regulation of the system of criminal court meeting was formally written into the Criminal procedure Law. The purpose of establishing the system is to improve the efficiency of judicial trial, to safeguard fairness and to resolve disputes. As the core of the preparatory process, the three years of implementation have effectively enhanced the participation of the three parties in the proceedings. At the same time, since China's pre-trial conference system has only just established an embryonic form, The relevant supporting legal and judicial interpretations are still relatively abstract, and their functions and functions cannot be fully brought into play in practice. The pre-court conference system has been in operation for three years in practice. There have been many classic cases. The author, in combination with the new Criminal procedure Law and the Judicial interpretation of the Supreme Law, deeply analyzes the non-standard procedure for the initiation of the pre-court meeting system at the present stage by using the methods of case description and comparative study of data. The scope of application is unclear, the participants have broad provisions, the specific content is not detailed, and the legal effect needs to be enhanced. With the increasing degree of judicial civilization in various countries in the world, the issue of human rights protection has been paid more and more attention to. Pre-court meetings and similar procedures have been continuously established and improved in countries around the world... there is no doubt that it is an unstoppable trend for States to incorporate the system of pre-trial meetings into their criminal procedure laws... however, given the specific national circumstances and the political context, The influence of history, culture, national customs, etc., the provisions of each country on the pre-court meeting are different. But generally speaking, The purpose of the pre-trial conference system is primarily to assist in the trial proceedings and to fully guarantee the rights of the relatively vulnerable defence. In the case of the pre-trial meeting, there is a necessary procedure for making the procedure mandatory, such as the United Kingdom, There are also ways in which ex officio and application initiation coexist, such as in the United States... the effectiveness of pre-family meetings varies from country to country, that is to say, the outcome of consultations on issues resolved in pre-trial meetings has played a different role and significance in subsequent court trials, If the minutes of the pre-court meeting in the United States are to be signed by the participants, Russia can use the pre-court meeting to decide such matters as the opening of the court session and the termination of the proceedings. The system of pre-court meetings is not only an essential part of the pre-court preparatory process. It is also a relatively independent stage of criminal proceedings, which is similar to the concepts of pre-trial preparation and pre-trial proceedings, but has different values and functions. Pre-court meetings have two major functions: procedural and substantive. Perfecting the system of pre-trial conference in our country will greatly improve the efficiency of criminal proceedings and safeguard the fairness of the administration of justice. How to improve the system of pretrial meeting in criminal proceedings in China is the key point of the article. The author begins with the initiation of the pretrial meeting, the presiding officer of the pretrial meeting, and the content of the pretrial meeting, From the point of view of judicial concept, the procedure of pretrial meeting deals with the relationship between substantive and procedural issues from the point of view of coordination of litigation efficiency and fairness and justice, and protection of the rights of the parties. From the point of view of specific program design, we should standardize the starting procedure of the pre-court meeting, delimit the applicable scope of the pre-court meeting, clarify the participants of the pre-court meeting, refine the content of the pre-court meeting, and enhance the legal effect of the pre-court meeting. The establishment of evidence display and preservation system with Chinese characteristics and the further improvement of our country's pre-court conference system are not only the inevitable requirements of the reform of the litigation system with "trial as the center". After the promulgation of the new Criminal procedure Law, the judicial practice problems need to be solved.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D925.2

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 ;云南省人民政府會議制度[J];云南政報;1990年08期

2 蔣松柏;;旁聽公民應(yīng)擁有發(fā)言權(quán)[J];江淮法治;2011年11期

3 蔡樂渭;李蓮丹;;論香港的行政會議制度及其對內(nèi)地行政政策模式改革的意義[J];研究生法學(xué);2003年02期

4 吳衛(wèi)國;;重慶人大會議制度(一)會議的概念、要素和類型[J];公民導(dǎo)刊;2004年06期

5 鄧曉蓉;吳婭;;重慶人大會議制度(八) 重慶市人代會會議安排和會后工作方案[J];公民導(dǎo)刊;2005年01期

6 閆健;;農(nóng)村民主治理新探索——關(guān)于貴州省湄潭縣村民集中訴求會議制度的思考[J];行政管理改革;2011年05期

7 ;河南省人民政府辦公廳關(guān)于嚴格遵守會議制度和會議紀律的通知[J];河南政報;1996年06期

8 ;吉林省人民政府辦公廳關(guān)于嚴格執(zhí)行會議制度和請假報告制度的通知吉政辦發(fā)[1997]14號[J];吉林政報;1997年10期

9 ;海南省人民政府辦公廳關(guān)于印發(fā)《海南省人民政府會議制度》的通知[J];海南政報;2005年02期

10 徐秉怡;;庭前會議制度運行中面臨的困境和出路[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(中旬);2014年06期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前10條

1 邱業(yè)綱 桂陽縣政協(xié)主席;群眾代表旁聽政協(xié)會議制度再思考[N];湘聲報;2012年

2 劉明華;實行“村民訴求會議制度”[N];中國紀檢監(jiān)察報;2008年

3 本報記者 王群歡 通訊員 易波;我市建立港澳臺僑聯(lián)席會議制度[N];湘潭日報;2009年

4 張大巍;沈陽建立“兩化”融合工作聯(lián)系會議制度[N];友報;2013年

5 本報記者;改進調(diào)研視察 嚴格會議制度[N];重慶政協(xié)報;2013年

6 萬剛遠;湄潭建立“村民集中訴求會議制度”[N];遵義日報;2008年

7 王家庚;庭前會議制度在實務(wù)中應(yīng)注意的問題[N];江蘇經(jīng)濟報;2013年

8 王合喜邋趙耀宇 孫新領(lǐng);西華縣人大建立健全常委會會議制度[N];周口日報;2008年

9 湖南省桂陽縣政協(xié)主席 邱業(yè)綱;建立群眾代表旁聽政協(xié)會議制度是擴大公民有序政治參與的有益嘗試[N];人民政協(xié)報;2010年

10 記者金衛(wèi)星;全國13個省市政府與同級總工會舉行聯(lián)席會議[N];人民日報;2002年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 張麗霞;我國刑事審判庭前會議制度研究[D];海南大學(xué);2015年

2 馬文茹;論我國刑事庭前會議制度[D];山東大學(xué);2015年

3 高立春;論刑事庭前會議制度[D];貴州大學(xué);2015年

4 王懿;論我國刑事訴訟庭前會議制度的完善[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2014年

5 吳麗亞;我國刑事庭前會議制度研究[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2015年

6 王詩光;刑事庭前會議制度研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2015年

7 潘瑞峰;刑事庭前會議制度研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2015年

8 孟祥明;刑事庭前會議制度的適用研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2015年

9 苑兆威;論我國刑事庭前會議制度的實施與完善[D];重慶大學(xué);2015年

10 于萍;我國刑事庭前會議制度的研究[D];青島大學(xué);2015年

，

本文編號：1565505