本文選題：非法證據(jù)排除 + 審前階段��； 參考：《華中科技大學(xué)》2016年碩士論文

【摘要】：威克斯訴美國(guó)一案確立了非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則,目前被世界上很多國(guó)家和地區(qū)采納和吸收。我國(guó)刑事訴訟法以立法的方式加以明確規(guī)定。在我國(guó),檢察機(jī)關(guān)不僅行使職務(wù)犯罪偵查權(quán)和公訴權(quán),還行使法律監(jiān)督的職權(quán)。參與全程的特點(diǎn)和獨(dú)特的訴訟屬性是檢察機(jī)關(guān)的雙重任務(wù),檢察機(jī)關(guān)排除非法證據(jù)決定了其在訴訟中的重要效能。近年來(lái),因刑訊逼供、侵犯人權(quán)、冤假錯(cuò)案頻發(fā),使得非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則在中國(guó)的發(fā)展成為熱點(diǎn)問(wèn)題。在本文中,比較分析、文獻(xiàn)分析和案例分析相結(jié)合,從非法證據(jù)在刑事訴訟中被予以起訴的角度進(jìn)行分析。首先,介紹檢察機(jī)關(guān)適用非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則概說(shuō)。該部分著重包含以下內(nèi)容:定義了非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則的概念;檢察機(jī)關(guān)適用的法理分析和理論剖析。其次,歸納審前階段我國(guó)檢察機(jī)關(guān)適用非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則的現(xiàn)狀,該部分主要是從審前批捕和審查起訴兩個(gè)階段介紹我國(guó)目前的適用狀況。再次,從前一部分的歸納內(nèi)容中可以總結(jié)出如下幾點(diǎn)問(wèn)題:第一,該規(guī)則缺乏一定的操作性;第二,檢察機(jī)關(guān)有消極適用該規(guī)則的情況;第三,案外因素的影響;第四,輿論越位干擾。然后,進(jìn)行域外考察。從大陸法系和英美法系中選取典型國(guó)家的立法例及判例,總結(jié)可供我國(guó)參考的啟示與借鑒。最后,以分析我國(guó)已有做法和域外經(jīng)驗(yàn)為基石,對(duì)于檢察機(jī)關(guān)在適用該規(guī)則的諸多實(shí)踐難題予以回應(yīng)。完善建議主要包括:完善檢察機(jī)關(guān)適用非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則的程序、建立檢察機(jī)關(guān)內(nèi)部激勵(lì)機(jī)制、切實(shí)建立防止干預(yù)司法的“防火墻”;實(shí)現(xiàn)檢察機(jī)關(guān)與社會(huì)輿論的良性互動(dòng)。
[Abstract]:Wilkes v. United States established the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence, which has been adopted and absorbed by many countries and regions in the world. The criminal procedure law of our country is clearly stipulated by way of legislation. In our country, the procuratorial organ not only exercises the power of investigation and prosecution, but also exercises the power of legal supervision. It is the double task of the procuratorial organs to participate in the whole process and the unique nature of the litigation. The procuratorial organs exclude the illegal evidence and determine its important effectiveness in the litigation. In recent years, illegal evidence exclusion rules have become a hot issue in China because of torture, human rights violations and false cases. In this paper, comparative analysis, literature analysis and case analysis are combined to analyze the prosecution of illegal evidence in criminal proceedings. First of all, the introduction of procuratorial organs to apply illegal evidence exclusion rules. This part mainly includes the following contents: the definition of the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence, the legal analysis and theoretical analysis applied by the procuratorial organ. Secondly, the author summarizes the current situation of the application of the rule of exclusion of illegal evidence by the procuratorial organs in the pre-trial stage, which mainly introduces the current situation of application in our country from the two stages of pretrial arrest and examination and prosecution. Thirdly, in the previous part of the inductive content, the following problems can be summed up: first, the rule lacks some maneuverability; second, the procuratorial organ has the situation of negative application of the rule; third, the influence of factors outside the case; and fourth, Public opinion interferes offside. Then, carry on the overseas investigation. From the continental law system and the Anglo-American law system, we select the typical countries' legislative cases and precedents, and summarize the enlightenment and reference for our country's reference. Finally, on the basis of analyzing the existing practice and overseas experience of our country, the procuratorial organs respond to many practical problems in the application of the rule. The perfection suggestion mainly includes: perfecting the procedure of procuratorial organ applying the rule of excluding illegal evidence, establishing the internal incentive mechanism of procuratorial organ, establishing the "firewall" of preventing judicial interference, and realizing the benign interaction between procuratorial organ and public opinion.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 伍志銳;;非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則、范圍與程序研究[J];廣西警官高等專(zhuān)科學(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2016年02期

2 岑詠華;張曉曄;林妙芬;;刑事非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則適用調(diào)查分析——以B市檢察院為例[J];廣西警官高等專(zhuān)科學(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2016年02期

3 褚福民;;如何完善刑事證據(jù)制度的運(yùn)行機(jī)制?——“以審判為中心”的訴訟制度改革為視角的分析[J];蘇州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年02期

4 楊晴晴;;偵查學(xué)視野下非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則之我見(jiàn)[J];法制與社會(huì);2016年08期

5 熊秋紅;;美國(guó)非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則的實(shí)踐及對(duì)我國(guó)的啟示[J];政法論壇;2015年03期

6 郭少杰;;論刑訊逼供產(chǎn)生與存續(xù)的原因[J];湖北警官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2015年02期

7 李明蓉;;非法取證訴訟監(jiān)督問(wèn)題研究[J];福建論壇(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2015年02期

8 藍(lán)向東;申文寬;;非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則實(shí)證分析[J];中國(guó)檢察官;2014年23期

9 劉靜坤;;非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則與庭審實(shí)質(zhì)化[J];法律適用;2014年12期

10 王彪;;非法口供排除規(guī)則威懾效果實(shí)證分析[J];河北法學(xué);2015年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 吳憲國(guó);檢察機(jī)關(guān)排除非法證據(jù)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 趙娜;我國(guó)非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則適用程序研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2013年

2 劉青華;非法證據(jù)排除的制度績(jī)效實(shí)證研究[D];華中科技大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號(hào)：2107806