本文選題：逮捕后羈押必要性審查 + 缺陷�。� 參考：《華東政法大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：逮捕后羈押是指犯罪嫌疑人、被告人被逮捕后，為了保證訴訟的順利進(jìn)行，而對其人身自由予以剝奪的一種刑事措施。如果羈押適用不當(dāng)，對于被押人員來說，其造成的侵害是不可挽回的。因此，世界各國普遍對于羈押的適用建立了嚴(yán)格的司法審查程序進(jìn)行控制，同時設(shè)立了完善的羈押救濟(jì)體系，以此給犯罪嫌疑人、被告人提供維護(hù)其合法權(quán)益的途徑。相比國內(nèi)，我國長期以來對羈押的審查和監(jiān)督存在立法的空白，，沒有構(gòu)建獨(dú)立的羈押審查制度，犯罪嫌疑人、被告人一旦被羈押也不能真正行使保護(hù)自己的權(quán)利。這也造成我國的逮捕率居高不下，監(jiān)獄、看守所人滿為患，濫用羈押、超期羈押等現(xiàn)象頻發(fā)。 經(jīng)過長期的理論探究和司法實踐，2012年我國《刑事訴訟法》（以下簡稱刑訴法）修改，以第93條正式確立了逮捕后羈押必要性審查制度，賦予檢察機(jī)關(guān)對羈押實行監(jiān)督和審查的權(quán)力，此舉是我國法治進(jìn)程中的一大進(jìn)步，具有劃時代的意義。捕后羈押必要性審查制度有利于貫徹尊重和保障人權(quán)的信條，維護(hù)犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的合法權(quán)益，有利于我國寬嚴(yán)相濟(jì)的刑事政策真正得到落實。同時，對于緩解我國高羈押率、控制羈押的濫用有所裨益。 刑訴法確立捕后羈押必要性審查制度的意義十分重大，相繼出臺的最高人民檢察院新頒布的《人民檢察院刑事訴訟規(guī)則(試行)》（以下簡稱《刑訴規(guī)則》）對該制度進(jìn)一步細(xì)化，但是縱觀整個制度，無論是法律的規(guī)制亦或?qū)嵺`的操作，都存在瑕疵，亟待完善。筆者基于對法律最樸素的信仰，希望通過勾勒完整的捕后羈押必要性審查制度的應(yīng)然構(gòu)造，使該制度在實踐中能夠真正發(fā)揮其應(yīng)有的作用，以盡一名法學(xué)生的綿薄之力。 本文試圖從以下四個部分對捕后羈押必要性審查制度進(jìn)行探討： 第一部分首先從理論層面上厘清捕后羈押必要性審查制度的基本定義，介紹該制度的功能、內(nèi)涵，并對其性質(zhì)進(jìn)行界定，重點(diǎn)闡述該制度對我國法治發(fā)展進(jìn)程的價值和意義。 第二部分介紹我國捕后羈押必要性審查制度的立法規(guī)制和實踐狀況。重點(diǎn)對刑訴法、《刑訴規(guī)則》相關(guān)規(guī)定進(jìn)行分析，總結(jié)立法的不足之處。了解全國各地對捕后羈押必要性審查制度的實施狀況，并對不同的運(yùn)行模式進(jìn)行評析。針對實踐中存在的狀況，分析阻礙該制度真正發(fā)揮作用的原因。 第三部分介紹國外的羈押司法審查制度及其司法救濟(jì)體系。通過比較英美法系、大陸法系制度的異同，總結(jié)出域外羈押制度的進(jìn)步之處，為構(gòu)建我國的羈押必要性審查制度提供借鑒。 第四部分在前三個部分的基礎(chǔ)上，重點(diǎn)書寫我國捕后羈押必要性審查制度的完善。提出該制度應(yīng)遵循的四大基本原則，細(xì)化羈押審查程序的各個環(huán)節(jié)和要素，同時構(gòu)建相關(guān)配套措施，強(qiáng)化檢察機(jī)關(guān)的內(nèi)部權(quán)力規(guī)制和獎勵機(jī)制的改革，以期對實踐操作有所裨益。
[Abstract]:Post-arrest detention is a kind of criminal measure that the criminal suspect and the accused are deprived of their personal liberty in order to ensure the smooth progress of the proceedings. If custody is not applied properly, the damage caused by it is irreparable to the detained person. Therefore, countries all over the world have established strict judicial review procedure to control the application of custody, and set up a perfect detention relief system to provide criminal suspects and defendants with a way to safeguard their legitimate rights and interests. Compared with domestic, there is a blank in legislation for the examination and supervision of custody in our country for a long time, there is no independent detention review system, criminal suspects and defendants can not really exercise their right to protect themselves once they are detained. This also causes our country's arrest rate to be high, the prison, the detention center is overcrowded, the abuse custody, the extended detention and so on phenomenon frequently occurs. After a long period of theoretical research and judicial practice, the Criminal procedure Law (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal procedure Law) was amended in 2012, and the system of examining the necessity of detention after arrest was formally established in Article 93. Giving procuratorial organs the power to supervise and examine custody is a great progress in the process of ruling by law in our country and has epoch-making significance. The system of examining the necessity of detention after arrest is conducive to carrying out the creed of respecting and protecting human rights, safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of criminal suspects and defendants, and is conducive to the implementation of our country's criminal policy of combining leniency and severity. At the same time, it is beneficial to alleviate the high detention rate and control the abuse of custody. It is of great significance for the Criminal procedure Law to establish the system of examining the necessity of custody after arrest. The new Criminal procedure rules of the people's Procuratorate (trial) promulgated by the Supreme people's Procuratorate (hereinafter referred to as the "rules of Criminal procedure") have further refined the system. But throughout the system, both the legal regulation and the practice of operation, there are defects, need to be improved. Based on the most simple belief in the law, the author hopes that the system can really play its due role in practice by outlining the proper structure of the system of examining the necessity of detention after arrest, so as to make the best of a student of law. This paper attempts to explore the necessity of post-arrest detention review system from the following four parts: The first part firstly clarifies the basic definition of the necessity examination system of detention after arrest from the theoretical level, introduces the function and connotation of the system, and defines its nature, with emphasis on the value and significance of the system to the development process of the rule of law in our country. The second part introduces the legislative regulation and practice of the necessity review system of detention after arrest in China. Focus on the criminal procedure law, the relevant provisions of the Criminal procedure rules, summed up the shortcomings of legislation. To understand the implementation of the necessity review system of detention after arrest in various parts of the country, and to evaluate the different operation modes. In view of the existing situation in practice, this paper analyzes the reasons that hinder the system from playing a real role. The third part introduces the judicial review system of custody and its judicial relief system. By comparing the similarities and differences between the Anglo-American law system and the continental law system, the author summarizes the progress of the extraterritorial detention system, and provides a reference for the construction of our country's detention necessity review system. On the basis of the first three parts, the fourth part focuses on the perfection of the examination system of the necessity of detention after arrest in China. The paper puts forward four basic principles that should be followed in the system, details the various links and elements of the detention examination procedure, constructs the relevant supporting measures, and strengthens the reform of the internal power regulation and reward mechanism of the procuratorial organs. With a view to practical operation is beneficial.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(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(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳衛(wèi)東,隋光偉;現(xiàn)代羈押制度的特征:目的、功能及實施要件[J];中國司法;2004年09期

2 陳光中;卞建林;陳衛(wèi)東;宋英輝;李晶;;《刑事訴訟法》修改專家筆談[J];中國司法;2012年05期

3 陸而啟;論羈押“必要性”[J];福建公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2005年02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 王貞會;;論羈押替代性措施的適用原則[J];貴州大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2012年03期

6 王希發(fā);;羈押必要性審查的理性審視[J];重慶廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報;2012年06期

7 王貞會;;羈押替代性措施的涵義、模式與功能省思[J];比較法研究;2013年02期

8 楊傳強(qiáng);李云鵬;;論聽證式羈押必要性審查模式的構(gòu)建[J];西部法學(xué)評論;2013年06期

9 但偉;;試析羈押必要性審查與看守所檢察[J];人民檢察;2010年24期

10 王貞會;茹艷紅;;羈押目的及其關(guān)聯(lián)命題之辨[J];山東警察學(xué)院學(xué)報;2011年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 于平;羈押審查程序要素論[D];吉林大學(xué);2010年

本文編號：1875576