本文選題：親屬拒證權(quán)　切入點(diǎn)：親親相隱　出處：《山東大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：親屬間的拒證權(quán)在我國(guó)法律傳統(tǒng)中由來(lái)已久,我們通常稱之為“親親相隱”。從先秦到民國(guó),親親相隱制度伴隨著我國(guó)傳統(tǒng)法律的整個(gè)進(jìn)程。自秦律最早將“親親相隱”的思想應(yīng)用于法律,到西漢開始以法令的形式確立“親親相隱制度”,再到《唐律疏議》中規(guī)定的“同居相為隱”制度,后世的宋、元、明、清歷代都沿襲了這一制度,直至民國(guó)時(shí)期仍然繼受“親親相隱”這一法律原則,而且將近親屬拒證規(guī)定為一種權(quán)利�！坝H親相隱制度”在古代能夠長(zhǎng)期存在的主要原因就是能夠鞏固皇權(quán)的統(tǒng)治,在封建社會(huì)實(shí)行家國(guó)一體的宗法制社會(huì)結(jié)構(gòu)下,保護(hù)家庭的穩(wěn)定就是保護(hù)了社會(huì)的穩(wěn)定,同時(shí)在古代刑民不分的律法傳統(tǒng)下,在一定程度上能夠緩解司法專橫與株連,能夠維護(hù)家庭倫理和血緣親情。筆者比較了英美法系國(guó)家,如英國(guó)和美國(guó),大陸法系國(guó)家,如德國(guó)、法國(guó)和日本法律制度中關(guān)于親屬拒證權(quán)的規(guī)定,與我國(guó)現(xiàn)行法律近親屬拒證權(quán)的缺失形成鮮明的對(duì)比。我國(guó)缺少近親屬拒證權(quán)制度的原因主要有五個(gè)方面：一是實(shí)體正義與程序正當(dāng)之間的價(jià)值失衡；二是取證方式與證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)之間的矛盾沖突；三是過(guò)于強(qiáng)調(diào)法的階級(jí)性屬性；四是長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)司法工具主義的影響；五是發(fā)現(xiàn)案件事實(shí)與強(qiáng)迫親屬作證的矛盾在我國(guó)并不突出。缺少近親屬拒證權(quán)制度明顯違背了公眾意愿,侵犯了個(gè)人自由,不利于基本人權(quán)的保護(hù)和法律權(quán)威的樹立。在司法實(shí)踐中破壞了家庭穩(wěn)定,降低了證據(jù)質(zhì)量,不利于程序法治的進(jìn)程與和諧社會(huì)的構(gòu)建。在我國(guó)法治化進(jìn)程中有必要重塑近親屬拒證權(quán)制度,當(dāng)然真正想要完善該制度還任重而道遠(yuǎn)。 本文試從近親屬拒證權(quán)的行使主體、行使范圍和行使方式三個(gè)方面建構(gòu)我國(guó)近親屬拒證權(quán)制度的框架,并應(yīng)著重加強(qiáng)對(duì)未成年近親屬的保護(hù),這對(duì)于完善我國(guó)的刑事訴訟法律制度和人權(quán)的保護(hù)意義重大。近親屬拒證權(quán)在我國(guó)行使的主體應(yīng)當(dāng)與現(xiàn)行刑事訴訟法相適應(yīng),即近親屬的范圍是犯罪嫌疑人或被告人的配偶、父母、子女、同胞兄弟姐妹,該四種主體之間如果是共同犯罪或者對(duì)于發(fā)生侵犯國(guó)家利益、社會(huì)秩序的犯罪、貪污瀆職類犯罪、針對(duì)近親屬的殺害和性犯罪等不能行使近親屬拒證權(quán)。為了保障近親屬拒證權(quán)的行使本文還從申請(qǐng)程序、救濟(jì)程序和放棄程序三個(gè)方面進(jìn)行了制度設(shè)計(jì)。筆者認(rèn)為近親屬行使拒證權(quán)就是被動(dòng)的不提供任何證據(jù)的狀態(tài),包括不提供物證、書證、視聽資料等能夠證明犯罪嫌疑人犯罪的證據(jù),如果近親屬積極主動(dòng)的幫助犯罪嫌疑人毀滅、偽造證據(jù),則不影響幫助毀滅、偽造證據(jù)罪或者窩藏、包庇罪的成立。
[Abstract]:The right of refusing proof between relatives has a long history in the legal tradition of our country.From the pre-Qin Dynasty to the Republic of China, the system of kin-relative concealment was accompanied by the whole process of Chinese traditional law.From the first application of the thought of "close relatives to each other" to the law, to the establishment of the system of "close relatives and relatives hiding each other" in the form of decrees in the Western Han Dynasty, to the system of "cohabitation as hidden" as stipulated in "Tang Ru-Shu", the Song, Yuan and Ming dynasties of later generations.The Qing Dynasty inherited this system, until the period of the Republic of China, it was still accepted the legal principle of "close relatives hide each other", and nearly relatives refused the certificate as a kind of right.In ancient times, the main reason for the existence of the "close-in-kin system" was to consolidate the rule of imperial power. Under the patriarchal social structure of the feudal society, the protection of the stability of the family was the protection of the stability of the society.At the same time, in the ancient law tradition, it can alleviate judicial arbitrariness and kinship to a certain extent, and can maintain family ethics and kinship.The author compares the provisions of the legal system of the common law system, such as the United Kingdom and the United States, and the continental law system, such as Germany, France and Japan, on the right of refusal of a relative's license, which is in sharp contrast to the lack of the right of refusal of a certificate by a close relative in the current law of our country.There are five main reasons for the lack of the system of the right of refusal of proof by close relatives in our country: first, the value imbalance between substantive justice and procedural justice; second, the conflict between the method of obtaining evidence and the standard of proof; third, too much emphasis on the class attribute of law;The fourth is the influence of judicial instrumentalism for a long time, and the fifth is that the contradiction between finding the facts of the case and forcing relatives to testify is not prominent in our country.The lack of close relatives' right to refuse proof obviously violates the public will, infringes on individual freedom, and is not conducive to the protection of basic human rights and the establishment of legal authority.In judicial practice, it destroys family stability, reduces the quality of evidence, and is not conducive to the process of procedural rule of law and the construction of a harmonious society.It is necessary to remould the system of the right of refusal of certificate by close relatives in the process of ruling by law in our country. Of course, there is still a long way to go in order to perfect the system.In this paper, the author tries to construct the framework of the system of the right of refusal of license of near relatives in our country from three aspects: the exercise subject, the scope and the mode of exercise of the right of refusal of certificate, and the emphasis should be placed on strengthening the protection of the near relatives of minors.This is of great significance to improve the legal system of criminal procedure and the protection of human rights.The subject of the exercise of the right of refusal of proof by close relatives in our country should be adapted to the current criminal procedure law, that is, the scope of close relatives is the spouse, parents, children, siblings of the suspect or defendant,If the four subjects commit a joint crime or the crime of violating national interests, social order, embezzlement and dereliction of duty, the killing and sexual crimes of the near relatives cannot exercise the right of refusing to testify by the near relatives.In order to guarantee the exercise of the right of refusal of certificate by close relatives, this paper also designs the system from three aspects: application procedure, relief procedure and renunciation procedure.The author believes that the exercise of the right of refusal by close relatives is a passive state of not providing any evidence, including material evidence, documentary evidence, audio-visual materials, and so on, which can prove the crime of a criminal suspect.If close relatives take the initiative to help criminal suspects destroy and forge evidence, it will not affect the establishment of the crime of helping to destroy, falsifying evidence or harbouring or harbouring it.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 李貴;;近親屬拒絕作證問(wèn)題淺析[J];廣西青年干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年04期

2 張本順;;刑事訴訟中的親屬拒證權(quán)制度研究[J];河北法學(xué);2008年10期

3 張淑君;;親屬拒證權(quán)的西方法淵源[J];商丘師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年10期

4 張潔;;“親親相隱”與“大義滅親”——談我國(guó)現(xiàn)行刑事訴訟法的修改與傳統(tǒng)法文化的關(guān)系[J];湖北職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1703669