【摘要】：證人證言作為刑事訴訟法定證據(jù)之一,其地位舉足輕重,對(duì)于收集相關(guān)證據(jù)、查清案件事實(shí)、準(zhǔn)確定罪量刑等方面都具有不可或缺的作用,同時(shí)對(duì)于審判中心主義改革的順利進(jìn)行意義重大。但是,我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中,證人出庭率低問(wèn)題始終影響著這一證據(jù)功能的發(fā)揮,限制了控辯雙方的質(zhì)證權(quán)。法定程序流于形式,影響著公平正義的實(shí)現(xiàn)及我國(guó)訴訟程序的構(gòu)建。這一問(wèn)題與證人的人身權(quán)利得不到充分的保護(hù)息息相關(guān)。現(xiàn)實(shí)中,一例又一例駭人聽(tīng)聞的證人被害案愈加引起證人出庭的憂慮。因此,完善證人人身制度,落實(shí)證人人身保護(hù)措施勢(shì)在必行。縱觀域外兩大法系某些代表性國(guó)家,證人人身保護(hù)始終是一項(xiàng)不容忽略的課題。無(wú)論是專門(mén)、完善的證人人身保護(hù)立法,亦或是設(shè)置強(qiáng)有力的證人保護(hù)機(jī)構(gòu),其基本都形成了一套符合本國(guó)現(xiàn)有國(guó)情、具有本民族精神特色的證人保護(hù)方案,在證人保護(hù)方面取得了良好的實(shí)踐效果。而反觀我國(guó)現(xiàn)行刑事訴訟法,經(jīng)屢次修改,其在證人人身保護(hù)方面取得了不斷地進(jìn)步和可喜的效果,但是,我們不難發(fā)現(xiàn)仍然存在很多值得推敲之處,主要表現(xiàn)在保護(hù)對(duì)象范圍過(guò)于狹窄;保護(hù)機(jī)關(guān)間責(zé)任分工不明確;保護(hù)措施單一、原則而不便于操作;缺乏一整套有效、完善的程序運(yùn)行機(jī)制等一系列亟需解決的問(wèn)題。學(xué)術(shù)界關(guān)于證人保護(hù)制度的研究也是不厭其煩,但是,大部分學(xué)者都是從宏觀上探討如何加強(qiáng)證人保護(hù),如保護(hù)對(duì)象、保護(hù)范圍、保護(hù)機(jī)構(gòu)、保護(hù)程序等角度展開(kāi)闡述,而很少學(xué)者從微觀方面如證人人身保護(hù)制度如何予以完善進(jìn)行著手論證。故而,文章將分為四個(gè)部分對(duì)刑事證人的人身保護(hù)制度分別予以探討:第一部分,對(duì)刑事訴訟證人人身保護(hù)基本概念界定,從人之本性、社會(huì)契約、權(quán)利義務(wù)平衡、人權(quán)保障四個(gè)理論淵源予以探討。繼而就程序正當(dāng)性、實(shí)體正義、司法資源的合理配置、契合國(guó)家保護(hù)潮流方面并結(jié)合我國(guó)證人出庭現(xiàn)狀得出完善證人的人身保護(hù)制度勢(shì)在必行。第二部分,對(duì)域外英美法系、大陸法系以及混合模式國(guó)家中具有代表性證人人身保護(hù)制度予以梳理整合、反思,最后就其能夠?yàn)槲宜梃b的制度作了相應(yīng)反思。第三部分,就我國(guó)現(xiàn)存的立法(實(shí)體法、程序法)、司法實(shí)踐現(xiàn)狀作了簡(jiǎn)單描述,其中,對(duì)相關(guān)存在的問(wèn)題進(jìn)行剖析,如立法散亂、保護(hù)對(duì)象范圍小、保護(hù)機(jī)構(gòu)不明確、保護(hù)措施、程序方面的不完善及缺乏有效地監(jiān)督機(jī)制與責(zé)任追究機(jī)制。第四部分,從保護(hù)原則的確立、立法模式的選擇、保護(hù)要素的分析、保護(hù)程序的完善、特殊證人的保護(hù)等方面對(duì)全文作出最終的思考和見(jiàn)解。
[Abstract]:As one of the evidence established in criminal procedure law, witness testimony plays an indispensable role in collecting relevant evidence, ascertaining the facts of the case, accurately determining the sentence and so on. At the same time, it is of great significance for the smooth progress of the reform of judicial centralism. However, in the judicial practice of our country, the low witness appearance rate has always affected the exertion of the evidence function and restricted the cross-examination right of the prosecution and the defense. Legal procedure is a mere formality, which affects the realization of fairness and justice and the construction of litigation procedure in our country. This problem is closely related to the lack of adequate protection of the personal rights of witnesses. In reality, one appalling witness after another is increasingly worrying about the witness's appearance. Therefore, it is imperative to perfect the witness's personal system and implement the witness's personal protection measures. Throughout some representative countries of the two legal systems, the habeas corpus of witnesses has always been a subject that can not be ignored. Whether it is a special, perfect legislation on witness habeas corpus or the establishment of a strong witness protection institution, it has basically formed a witness protection scheme which is in line with the existing national conditions of our country and has its own national spirit. Good practical effect has been obtained in witness protection. On the other hand, the current Criminal procedure Law of our country has made continuous progress and gratifying results in the aspect of witness habeas corpus after repeated revision. However, it is not difficult to find that there are still a lot of things worth studying. The main performance is that the scope of the protection object is too narrow; the division of responsibilities between the protection organs is not clear; the protection measures are single, the principle is not easy to operate; the lack of a set of effective, perfect procedure operation mechanism and so on, a series of problems need to be solved. The research on witness protection system in academic circles is also painstaking. However, most scholars discuss how to strengthen witness protection from macro perspective, such as the object of protection, the scope of protection, the institution of protection, the procedure of protection, and so on. And few scholars from micro aspects such as witness habeas corpus system how to improve the start of the argument. Therefore, the article will be divided into four parts to explore the criminal witness habeas corpus system: the first part, the basic concept of the criminal procedure witness habeas corpus, from the human nature, social contract, the balance of rights and obligations, Four theoretical sources of human rights protection are discussed. Then, it is imperative to perfect the witness's personal protection system in terms of procedural legitimacy, substantive justice, reasonable allocation of judicial resources, fit in with the trend of national protection and combining with the present situation of witnesses appearing in court in our country. The second part combs and rethinks the representative witness habeas corpus system in the extraterritorial Anglo-American legal system, the civil law system and the mixed mode countries, and finally makes the corresponding reflection on the system which can be used for reference by me. The third part briefly describes the existing legislation (substantive law, procedural law) and the current situation of judicial practice in our country. Among them, it analyzes the related problems, such as legislative disorder, small scope of protection object, unclear protection organization, Protection measures, procedural imperfections and lack of effective supervision and accountability mechanisms. The fourth part, from the protection principle establishment, the legislation pattern choice, the protection essential factor analysis, the protection procedure consummation, the special witness protection and so on aspect to make the final thought and the opinion.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：廣西民族大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張春利;;我國(guó)刑事證人保護(hù)的困境與出路[J];江西警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2015年02期

2 張艷麗;;職務(wù)犯罪案件證人保護(hù)制度的完善[J];黑龍江省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2015年01期

3 王永杰;;兩大法系證人保護(hù)制度的比較與借鑒[J];犯罪研究;2011年02期

4 潘效國(guó);;俄羅斯聯(lián)邦關(guān)于被害人、證人及其他刑事訴訟程序參加人國(guó)家保護(hù)法[J];環(huán)球法律評(píng)論;2009年04期

5 王芳;;國(guó)外證人保護(hù)制度探析[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬刊);2009年02期

6 吳姍姍;;論刑事證人保護(hù)制度的理論基礎(chǔ)[J];長(zhǎng)江大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年04期

7 王忠華;;淺談證人出庭作證及權(quán)益保護(hù)[J];中國(guó)檢察官;2006年01期

8 高春興;關(guān)于我國(guó)刑事訴訟中人權(quán)保障問(wèn)題之研究[J];山東警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期

9 吳丹紅;證人保護(hù)制度探析[J];華東政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年03期

10 朱福勇;完善證人作證制度的立法構(gòu)想[J];淮南職業(yè)技術(shù)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前8條

1 李地;我國(guó)刑事訴訟中證人保護(hù)制度研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

2 蘇麗;我國(guó)刑事證人保護(hù)制度研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2013年

3 郭萌萌;刑事證人保護(hù)制度研究[D];河北大學(xué);2013年

4 范愛(ài)麗;論刑事訴訟證人保護(hù)制度[D];青島大學(xué);2012年

5 文世tq;論刑事證人的人身保護(hù)[D];山西大學(xué);2010年

6 禹世倫;論刑事證人保護(hù)制度[D];山東大學(xué);2008年

7 李偉;論我國(guó)刑事訴訟中證人的安全保護(hù)[D];蘭州大學(xué);2008年

8 羅秀艷;刑事證人保護(hù)制度研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2007年

，

本文編號(hào)：2168180