發(fā)布時間：2018-05-28 00:39

  本文選題：技術(shù)偵查證據(jù) + 證據(jù)能力��； 參考：《華南理工大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：技術(shù)偵查措施是一把雙刃劍，，既有利于偵破高科技、智能化和隱蔽性較強(qiáng)的刑事案件，也容易侵犯公民個人隱私和公共利益。技術(shù)偵查措施以其隱蔽、高效等優(yōu)點，在應(yīng)對日新月異的犯罪形式中起到無可替代的作用，被廣泛應(yīng)用于各類重大案件偵破中，技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)在指證犯罪中也起著至關(guān)重要的作用。但是，長期以來我國法律體系中并沒有對技術(shù)偵查措施作出具體規(guī)定，導(dǎo)致技術(shù)偵查措施雖然在偵查實踐中被廣泛使用，但通過技術(shù)偵查措施獲得的材料能否在刑事訴訟過程中作為證據(jù)使用存在較大的爭議。 2010年6月出臺的《關(guān)于辦理死刑案件審查判斷證據(jù)若干問題的規(guī)定》第35條，以及2012年3月通過的《刑事訴訟法》（修正案）均原則性地肯定技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力，但對其使用方法、范圍以及非法證據(jù)排除等規(guī)則并無具體規(guī)定。因此在司法實踐中，通過技術(shù)偵查措施獲得的證據(jù)材料將仍然無法在庭審中直接作為證據(jù)使用。解決其證據(jù)能力的普遍做法是，將技術(shù)偵查獲得的證據(jù)材料“轉(zhuǎn)化”為法定的證據(jù)類型后，才能用作定罪量刑的依據(jù)。但這種“轉(zhuǎn)化”的方式本身存在很多問題，因此解決我國技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力問題對司法實踐具有極其深遠(yuǎn)的意義。 本文將立足于司法實踐，通過對技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)證據(jù)能力的研究，探索解決技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)在司法實踐中遇到的問題。筆者認(rèn)為，在立法明確規(guī)定技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)具有證據(jù)能力的前提下，解決技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)證據(jù)能力的關(guān)鍵是建立符合我國國情的證據(jù)能力認(rèn)定規(guī)則，以此規(guī)范偵查機(jī)關(guān)的技術(shù)偵查行為，保護(hù)犯罪嫌疑人或被告的合法權(quán)益，促使技術(shù)偵查證據(jù)在指控犯罪中更好地發(fā)揮作用。
[Abstract]:The measure of technical investigation is a double-edged sword, which is not only conducive to the detection of high-tech, intelligent and hidden criminal cases, but also easy to encroach on citizens' personal privacy and public interests. Technical investigation measures, with their advantages of concealment and high efficiency, play an irreplaceable role in dealing with the ever-changing forms of crime, and are widely used in the detection of various major cases. Technical investigation evidence also plays a vital role in the identification of crimes. However, the technical investigation measures have not been specified in our country's legal system for a long time, which has resulted in the technical investigation measures being widely used in the investigation practice. However, whether the materials obtained through technical investigation measures can be used as evidence in criminal proceedings is controversial. Article 35 of the provisions on the examination and judgment of evidence in death penalty cases, introduced in June 2010, and the Criminal procedure Code (Amendment), adopted in March 2012, all affirm in principle the evidentiary capacity of technical investigation evidence, However, there is no specific regulation on its use method, scope and exclusion of illegal evidence. Therefore, in judicial practice, evidence materials obtained through technical investigation measures will still not be directly used as evidence in court. The general practice to solve its evidentiary ability is to "transform" the evidence material obtained by technical investigation into a legal type of evidence before it can be used as the basis for conviction and sentencing. However, there are many problems in this way of "transformation", so it is of great significance for judicial practice to solve the problem of evidence capacity of technical investigation evidence in our country. This article will be based on the judicial practice, through the research of the technical investigation evidence ability, to explore and solve the technical investigation evidence in the judicial practice encountered problems. In the author's opinion, the key to solve the problem of technical investigation evidence ability is to establish the rules of evidence capacity identification in accordance with the national conditions of our country, on the premise of legislating clearly that the technical investigation evidence has the evidence ability. In order to standardize the technical investigation behavior of investigative organs, protect the legitimate rights and interests of suspects or defendants, and promote the evidence of technical investigation to play a better role in the charge of crimes.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華南理工大學(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;付磊;;我國證據(jù)能力制度的反思與完善[J];證據(jù)科學(xué);2008年01期

2 何家弘;秘密偵查立法之我見[J];法學(xué)雜志;2004年06期

3 何家弘;;論證據(jù)的基本范疇[J];法學(xué)雜志;2007年01期

4 何家弘;;證據(jù)的審查與認(rèn)定原理論綱[J];法學(xué)家;2008年03期

5 胡志風(fēng);張美琳;劉新凱;;特殊偵查措施及其獲取證據(jù)的法律適用問題[J];中國公證;2010年12期

6 李莉;論刑事證據(jù)的證據(jù)能力對證明力的影響[J];中外法學(xué);1999年04期

7 劉云飛;;論庭審中秘密偵查證據(jù)的采信[J];延邊黨校學(xué)報;2011年02期

8 方全,劉晶;刑事偵查中特殊偵查手段的運(yùn)用與制約[J];犯罪研究;2002年05期

9 王瑞山;;我國技術(shù)偵查的法律困境與出路選擇[J];犯罪研究;2011年01期

10 陳太勇,沈慶良;刑事訴訟證據(jù)能力的三種屬性[J];中國律師;2003年12期

本文編號：1944506