本文選題：發(fā)回重審 + 立法現(xiàn)狀��； 參考：《西南政法大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審是指在我國刑事再審程序中，依照第二審程序審理再審案件的人民法院經審理認為原審人民法院的已生效裁判存在法定情形時，作出的撤銷原判，將案件發(fā)回原審人民法院重新審判的一種處理方式。眾所周知，我國長期存在“重實體、輕程序”，“重秩序、輕自由”，“重打擊、輕保護”的傳統(tǒng)司法觀念。作為特殊救濟程序中的發(fā)回重審制度的設置和運行，依然逃脫不了上述傳統(tǒng)司法觀念的束縛，而且在一定程度上，該制度的設置是上述傳統(tǒng)司法觀念的貫徹和落實。刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度，，不僅缺乏現(xiàn)代的司法理念作理論支撐，而且在立法和司法實踐中都存在諸多的問題，更甚的是在司法實踐中造成了很多不利的影響。對刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度進行研究目的在于，在現(xiàn)代先進的法治理念指導下對刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制進行深入分析，提出廢除再審中發(fā)回重審做法的合理建議。 本文采用理論和實踐相結合的方法，從刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度的概念、法律特征和理論依據出發(fā)，對該制度的立法現(xiàn)狀進行了比較細致地分析，并對該制度的司法實踐進行了考察和分析，接著進行了比較深入地理性反思，最后建議廢除我國現(xiàn)行的刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度。 本文由引言、正文和小結三大部分組成。其中正文又分為四個小部分。 第一部分概述了刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度的概念、法律特征及設置該制度的理論依據。第二部分對我國刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度從立法和司法實踐進行了全面考察和深入分析。第三部分對我國刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度進行了理性地反思。第四部分建議廢除我國刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度，并從廢除該制度的必要性和可行性兩方面進行了分析，最后還提出廢除發(fā)回重審制度后的處理。其一，廢除刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度是保障被告人的公正審判權、提高刑事再審訴訟效率、實現(xiàn)再審人民法院對原審人民法院有效監(jiān)督的需要。其二，廢除刑事再審中的發(fā)回重審制度也具有可行性。因為刑事再審案件數(shù)量有限，而且現(xiàn)行的以再審理由為重點的全面審查方式也能夠保障再審裁判的質量。其三，刑事再審案件應當堅持開庭審理的審理方式，堅持以再審理由為重點的全面審查原則，保障案件當事人獲得律師幫助的權利。
[Abstract]:Retrial in criminal retrial refers to the revocation of the original judgment made by a people's court hearing a retrial case in accordance with the second instance procedure in our country when the people's court considers that there is a statutory situation in the effective judgment of the people's court of the original instance, A method of handling a case back to a people's court for a new trial. As we all know, our country has long existed the traditional judicial concept of "attaching importance to substance, neglecting procedure", "emphasizing order, neglecting freedom", "attaching importance to strike, not protecting". As the setup and operation of the retrial system in the special relief procedure, it still can not escape the bondage of the above-mentioned traditional judicial concepts, and to some extent, the establishment of the system is the implementation and implementation of the above-mentioned traditional judicial concepts. The system of retrial in criminal retrial not only lacks the theoretical support of modern judicial idea, but also has many problems in legislation and judicial practice, and has caused many adverse effects in judicial practice. The purpose of the research on the system of retrial in criminal retrial is to analyze deeply the system of retrial in criminal retrial under the guidance of the modern advanced concept of rule of law, and to put forward some reasonable suggestions for abolishing the practice of retrial in retrial. Based on the concept, legal characteristics and theoretical basis of the system of retrial in criminal retrial, this paper, by combining theory and practice, makes a detailed analysis of the present legislative situation of the system. The judicial practice of this system has been investigated and analyzed, and then the rational reflection has been carried out, and finally it is proposed to abolish the current system of retrial in criminal retrial in our country. This paper consists of three parts: introduction, text and summary. The text is divided into four parts. The first part summarizes the concept, legal characteristics and theoretical basis of the system of retrial in criminal retrial. The second part makes a comprehensive investigation and in-depth analysis on the system of retrial in criminal retrial from the legislative and judicial practice. The third part makes a rational reflection on the retrial system of criminal retrial in our country. The fourth part proposes to abolish the system of retrial in criminal retrial in China, and analyzes the necessity and feasibility of abolishing the system. Finally, it puts forward the treatment after abolishing the system of retrial. First, abolishing the system of retrial in the criminal retrial is to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial, to improve the efficiency of the criminal retrial, and to realize the need for the people's court of retrial to supervise the people's court of the original instance effectively. Second, abolishing the system of retrial in criminal retrial is also feasible. Because the number of criminal retrial cases is limited, and the current comprehensive review mode focusing on retrial reasons can also guarantee the quality of retrial adjudication. Third, the criminal retrial case should adhere to the trial mode of the court session, adhere to the principle of comprehensive review focused on the reason of retrial, and guarantee the right of the parties to the case to obtain the help of the lawyer.
【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 謝小妹,項紅;刑事再審程序的效益分析[J];安徽水利水電職業(yè)技術學院學報;2005年02期

2 張艷麗,李德升;對我國發(fā)回重審制度的思考[J];北京理工大學學報(社會科學版);2005年04期

3 張步文;楊加明;;論刑事發(fā)回重審制度之廢除——解讀《中華人民共和國刑事訴訟法》第二修正案(學者建議稿)的相關規(guī)定[J];重慶郵電學院學報(社會科學版);2006年01期

4 謝佑平,萬毅;法理視野中的刑事訴訟效率和期間:及時性原則研究[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;2003年02期

5 鄧思清;論審判監(jiān)督的理論基礎[J];法律科學.西北政法學院學報;2003年03期

6 陳衛(wèi)東;杜磊;;再審程序的理解與適用——兼評《刑事訴訟法》關于再審程序的修改[J];法學雜志;2012年05期

7 周立平;略論刑事訴訟經濟原則[J];法學;1993年02期

8 龍宗智,李常青;論司法獨立與司法受制[J];法學;1998年12期

9 姜保忠;;刑事發(fā)回重審制度的問題與完善[J];法治研究;2010年11期

10 焦盛榮;;提高我國刑事訴訟效率的思考[J];甘肅政法學院學報;2009年02期

本文編號：1978733