本文選題：職務(wù)犯罪案件 + 跨行政區(qū)劃管轄��； 參考：《安徽大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】："職務(wù)犯罪案件跨行政區(qū)劃管轄"是指,為了防止地方黨政權(quán)力以及涉嫌職務(wù)犯罪的嫌疑人、被告人利用業(yè)緣關(guān)系對(duì)偵查活動(dòng)、審判活動(dòng)的公正性產(chǎn)生負(fù)面作用,進(jìn)而由異地檢察院、法院代為偵查、起訴和審判的一種刑事訴訟管轄制度。從域外法的經(jīng)驗(yàn)看,雖然沒(méi)有對(duì)職務(wù)犯罪案件跨行政區(qū)劃管轄的直接規(guī)定,但從其司法制度來(lái)看,或多或少地反映出地方行政區(qū)劃與司法區(qū)劃適當(dāng)分離的特征,其目的也正是為了以防止地方權(quán)力對(duì)司法獨(dú)立、司法公正的消極影響。以美國(guó)為例,美國(guó)往往利用獨(dú)立于體制之外的公民陪審團(tuán)行使對(duì)職務(wù)犯罪的偵查權(quán),而在審判環(huán)節(jié),美國(guó)憲法劃清了中央司法機(jī)關(guān)和地方司法機(jī)關(guān)管轄的范圍,有效的防止了地方保護(hù)主義。職務(wù)犯罪案件跨行政區(qū)劃管轄的意義主要也就在于,能夠使檢察院、法院公正行使偵查權(quán)和審判權(quán),在實(shí)現(xiàn)司法案件的程序性效益的同時(shí),保障司法辦案人員免受地方權(quán)力裹挾。從我國(guó)"職務(wù)犯罪案件跨行政區(qū)劃管轄"的歷史發(fā)展來(lái)看,魏晉時(shí)期的八議制度、宋代的翻異別勘制度,雖然其本質(zhì)是為了維護(hù)封建君主制與封建等級(jí)制,但隱約地能夠體現(xiàn)防止地方權(quán)力干預(yù)司法的"法治"精神。我國(guó)現(xiàn)代意義上的"職務(wù)犯罪案件跨行政區(qū)劃管轄"其實(shí)開(kāi)端于2001年"慕馬案",該案中涉及主要官員,大都交由其所在地以外的人民檢察院、人民法院管轄。但是從2001年-2016年,十五載的時(shí)間里,職務(wù)犯罪案件交由異地人民檢察院、人民法院管轄,在我國(guó)立法上并無(wú)直接規(guī)定。在司法實(shí)務(wù)中,往往是通過(guò)上級(jí)人民檢察院、人民法院指定下級(jí)人民檢察院、人民法院管轄以實(shí)現(xiàn)職務(wù)犯罪案件管轄跨區(qū)劃。這種異地管轄存在著缺乏明確法律依據(jù)、被管轄主體范圍不清、侵犯犯罪嫌疑人或被告人合法權(quán)益等問(wèn)題。為此,2014年12月中央開(kāi)始在北京、上海推行跨行政區(qū)劃人民檢察院、跨行政區(qū)劃人民法院的試點(diǎn),試圖創(chuàng)新職務(wù)犯罪的管轄方式,但是這次改革,依然沒(méi)有突破指定管轄這一視閾限制,沒(méi)有從根本上改變職務(wù)犯罪管轄權(quán)本質(zhì)即司法系統(tǒng)內(nèi)部的權(quán)力再分配。推進(jìn)我國(guó)的職務(wù)犯罪案件管轄制度建設(shè),宏觀層面上,應(yīng)對(duì)該制度的基本原則加以規(guī)定,司法區(qū)劃與行政區(qū)劃適當(dāng)分離原則、司法經(jīng)濟(jì)原則、犯罪嫌疑人與被告人人權(quán)保障原則等都應(yīng)被貫徹落實(shí)。微觀層面上,要在立法上明確跨行政區(qū)劃?rùn)z察院、法院對(duì)職務(wù)犯罪案件的享有專(zhuān)屬管轄權(quán);同時(shí),跨行政區(qū)劃?rùn)z察院、法院的地域設(shè)置,人、財(cái)、物的管理要與行政區(qū)劃適當(dāng)分離,并且跨行政區(qū)劃?rùn)z察院、法院應(yīng)有兩級(jí)機(jī)構(gòu)設(shè)定;此外,為保障跨行政區(qū)劃?rùn)z察院、法院在管轄職務(wù)犯罪案件中兼顧效率與人權(quán),應(yīng)當(dāng)厘清并優(yōu)化跨行政區(qū)劃?rùn)z察院、法院與紀(jì)檢部門(mén)的關(guān)系、完善強(qiáng)制措施設(shè)計(jì)工作、賦予犯罪嫌疑人或被告人管轄異議權(quán)以及申請(qǐng)羈押必要性審查的權(quán)利。最后,并非不重要的是,全國(guó)人大常委會(huì)也應(yīng)設(shè)立專(zhuān)門(mén)機(jī)構(gòu)來(lái)監(jiān)督跨行政區(qū)劃?rùn)z察院、法院的司法權(quán)力。
[Abstract]:"Duty crime cases cross administrative division jurisdiction" means that in order to prevent the local party and government power and suspects suspected of duty crime, the defendant makes use of the relationship of the industry to have a negative effect on the impartiality of the investigation activities and trial activities, and then a criminal procedure jurisdiction system, which is replaced by the procuratorate and the court, is replaced by a criminal procedure jurisdiction system. The experience of extraterritorial law shows that, although there is no direct provision of the jurisdiction of the administrative division of the duty crime case, but from its judicial system, it reflects more or less the proper separation between the local administrative division and the judicial division, and its purpose is to prevent the local power from the judicial independence and the judicial impartiality. As an example, the United States often uses the civil jurors independent of the system to exercise the power of investigation for the duty crime. In the trial link, the United States Constitution delicits the jurisdiction of the central judiciary and the local judiciary, effectively preventing the local protectionism. It can make the procuratorate and the court impartially exercise the right of investigation and trial, and ensure the procedural benefits of judicial cases, while guaranteeing the judicial personnel to be protected from the local power. From the historical development of the "cross administrative division jurisdiction of the duty crime cases" in our country, the eight system of the Wei and Jin Dynasties and the reconnaissance of the Song Dynasty The quality is to maintain the feudal monarchy and the feudal hierarchy, but indistinctly embody the "rule of law" that prevents local power from interfering in the judiciary. In the modern sense, "the jurisdiction of the administrative division of the duty crime" began in the "Mu Ma case" in 2001. In this case, the main officials were mainly referred to the people's Procuratorate outside its place. The people's court is under the jurisdiction of the people's court, but from the time of -2016 2001 and fifteen, the crime of duty is handed over to the people's Procuratorate and the people's court, and there is no direct regulation in our country's legislation. In judicial practice, the people's Procuratorate is often passed by the superior people's Procuratorate, the people's court has designated the lower level people's Procuratorate, and the people's court has jurisdiction to realize the duty. Criminal cases have jurisdiction over zoning. There are many problems such as the lack of clear legal basis, the unclear jurisdiction of the subject, the infringement of the legitimate rights and interests of the criminal suspects or the accused. In December 2014, the Central Committee began in Beijing, Shanghai carried out the people's Procuratorate of the cross administrative division, and tried to innovate the trial of the people's Court of the cross administrative division. However, this reform still does not break through the threshold limit of the designated jurisdiction, and does not fundamentally change the essence of the jurisdiction of the duty crime, that is, the redistribution of power within the judicial system, and to promote the construction of the jurisdiction system of the case of the crime in China, and to stipulate the basic principles of the system on the macro level. The principle of proper separation between the division of law and the administrative division, the principle of judicial economy and the principle of the protection of the rights of the criminal suspects and the defendants all should be carried out. At the micro level, the procuratorate should be clearly defined in the legislature, and the court has exclusive jurisdiction over the case of the duty crime; at the same time, the regional setting of the procuratorate of the administrative division and the court The management of people, money and things should be properly separated from the administrative division, and the court should be set up by two levels of institutions. In addition, in order to ensure the efficiency and human rights of the procuratorate, the court should clarify and optimize the relationship between the procuratorate of the administrative division, the court and the discipline inspection department, and the relationship between the court and the discipline inspection department. It is not unimportant that the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress should also set up a special institution to supervise the judicial power of the procuratorate of the court and the court.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：安徽大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 黃亮亮;職務(wù)犯罪異地管轄研究[D];南京大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：1856006