本文選題：檢察機(jī)關(guān) + 捕訴資源整合　； 參考：《東北師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：審查逮捕和審查起訴兩項(xiàng)職能是檢察機(jī)關(guān)刑事法律監(jiān)督的重要職能,分別由偵查監(jiān)督部門和公訴部門承擔(dān),共同發(fā)揮打擊追訴犯罪、監(jiān)督偵查權(quán)力、保障人權(quán)等作用。我國(guó)檢察機(jī)關(guān)長(zhǎng)期遵循的這種“捕訴分立”的刑事檢察工作模式,卻產(chǎn)生了諸如辦案質(zhì)量不高、訴訟效率低下、監(jiān)督乏力等無法適應(yīng)當(dāng)前檢察工作形勢(shì)的一系列問題。為了公正高效行使捕訴職能,本文在原有“捕訴合一”辦案模式理論與實(shí)踐基礎(chǔ)上,以吉林省檢察機(jī)關(guān)捕訴關(guān)系改革工作為研究樣本,提出以“捕訴資源整合”辦案機(jī)制作為解決當(dāng)前“捕訴分立”所帶來的一系列問題的刑事檢察工作模式。第一部分,從偵查監(jiān)督與公訴兩項(xiàng)職能的性質(zhì)和內(nèi)容入手,對(duì)檢察制度改革過程中二者關(guān)系的沿革來展開探討,厘清捕訴職能的內(nèi)在區(qū)別與聯(lián)系;第二部分,對(duì)我國(guó)檢察機(jī)關(guān)現(xiàn)有捕訴關(guān)系的現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行分析,重點(diǎn)論證了“捕訴資源整合”辦案機(jī)制的可行性;第三部分,結(jié)合吉林省檢察機(jī)關(guān)的實(shí)踐探索,圍繞“捕訴資源整合”辦案機(jī)制概念及特點(diǎn),全面闡述了該機(jī)制在制度保障、運(yùn)行效果以及實(shí)踐中的價(jià)值作用;第四部分,從加強(qiáng)訴訟監(jiān)督的路徑探索、科學(xué)設(shè)計(jì)辦案規(guī)則流程、規(guī)范開展檢察引導(dǎo)偵查工作、推進(jìn)司法辦案“去行政化”、有機(jī)結(jié)合“案件繁簡(jiǎn)分流”工作機(jī)制、合理設(shè)置對(duì)刑事案件考核機(jī)制和考核指標(biāo)、刑事檢察隊(duì)伍建設(shè)的遠(yuǎn)景規(guī)劃七個(gè)方面,對(duì)“捕訴資源整合”辦案機(jī)制提出了進(jìn)一步的完善意見和路徑規(guī)劃。
[Abstract]:The two functions of examining and arresting and examining and prosecuting are the important functions of the procuratorial organs' criminal legal supervision, which are respectively undertaken by the investigation and supervision departments and the public prosecution departments, and play a joint role in cracking down on the prosecution of crimes, supervising the powers of investigation, and safeguarding human rights. This pattern of criminal procuratorial work, which has been followed by procuratorial organs for a long time, has produced a series of problems, such as low quality of handling cases, low efficiency of litigation, weak supervision and so on, which can not adapt to the current situation of procuratorial work. In order to carry out the function of prosecution fairly and efficiently, this paper, based on the theory and practice of the original mode of "the unity of arrest and prosecution", takes the reform of the relationship between the prosecution and the prosecution of Jilin Province as the research sample. This paper puts forward the criminal procuratorial work mode to solve a series of problems brought about by the separation of arrest and prosecution with the mechanism of "integrating the resources of arrest and prosecution". The first part, starting with the nature and content of the two functions of investigation supervision and public prosecution, discusses the evolution of the relationship between the two functions in the course of the procuratorial system reform, and clarifies the inherent differences and links between the two functions. Based on the analysis of the current situation of the relationship between the prosecution and the prosecution in China, the author emphatically demonstrates the feasibility of the case handling mechanism of "the integration of the resources of the arrest and prosecution". The third part, combined with the practice of the procuratorial organs in Jilin Province, Focusing on the concept and characteristics of the case handling mechanism of "integrating the resources of arrest and litigation", this paper comprehensively expounds the value function of the mechanism in the system guarantee, operation effect and practice. Scientifically design the flow of case handling rules, standardize the procuratorial work, guide the investigation, promote the "de-administration" of judicial handling cases, organically combine the work mechanism of "simple and simple case diversion", and reasonably set up the examination mechanism and assessment indicators for criminal cases. There are seven aspects of the long-term planning of the construction of the criminal procuratorial team, and some suggestions and path planning are put forward for the case handling mechanism of "the integration of the resources of arrest and prosecution".
【學(xué)位授予單位】：東北師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2;D926.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 謝登科;;功能與進(jìn)路:最高人民法院巡回法庭探析[J];朝陽法律評(píng)論;2016年01期

2 汪海燕;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)審查逮捕權(quán)異化與消解[J];政法論壇;2014年06期

3 樓伯坤;;論我國(guó)逮捕權(quán)的歸屬——以檢察機(jī)關(guān)擁有偵查權(quán)為前提[J];浙江工商大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2013年02期

4 朱孝清;;論訴訟監(jiān)督[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年05期

5 謝維;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)捕訴一體化工作機(jī)制的創(chuàng)新研究[J];廣西師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年S2期

6 吳嶠濱;論檢察權(quán)的性質(zhì)及其優(yōu)化設(shè)置[J];福州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年04期

7 姜偉;公訴的價(jià)值[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年02期

8 陳衛(wèi)東;我國(guó)檢察權(quán)的反思與重構(gòu)——以公訴權(quán)為核心的分析[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年02期

9 許永俊,王宏偉;捕訴合一辦案機(jī)制研究[J];國(guó)家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2001年01期

10 陳瑞華;司法權(quán)的性質(zhì)——以刑事司法為范例的分析[J];法學(xué)研究;2000年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前2條

1 孫峰松;王默;牟莎莎;;在改革中砥礪前行的吉林檢察[N];吉林日?qǐng)?bào);2017年

2 鄭博超;;守在糾錯(cuò)案防冤案前沿[N];檢察日?qǐng)?bào);2016年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 陳亮;檢察機(jī)關(guān)捕訴關(guān)系研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：1875714