法官庭外調(diào)查制度實(shí)證研究
[Abstract]:In a criminal trial, when there is evidence of doubt in the course of a court trial, the judge goes out of the court to investigate and verify the relevant evidence in order to confirm the authenticity, legality and objectivity of the suspect evidence, and to ascertain the truth of the case. And then help the formation of inner judgment, to make the correct judgment. This is the judge's right to investigate out of court. Judge's out of court investigation is the extension of court trial out of court, and has the corresponding power attribute, the judge should maintain the passive neutral posture when investigating and verifying the evidence. Although the Criminal procedure Law of our country has been amended twice, it still retains the system of out-of-court investigation of judges, which is controversial, on the basis of a little restriction, and lacks clear and detailed regulations. There are many problems in the system of out of court investigation of judges in judicial practice, which deeply reflects the value conflict between substantive justice and procedural justice of the system. However, under the influence of our country's historical and cultural tradition, the leading factor of authority doctrine and the realistic foundation of serious imbalance of the power of prosecution and defense, the system of out-of-court investigation of judges has its rationality and necessity in our country. On the basis of drawing lessons from the advantages of the design of the out-of-court investigation system of the judges in the extra-territorial law system, especially in the countries of the continental law system and the "mixed" litigation mode, this paper bases itself on the specific conditions of the judicial practice in our country. In order to better serve the purpose of criminal trial "punishing crime and protecting human rights", the investigation system of judges out of court should be reformed and perfected accordingly. This paper will reflect on the current legal system of our country through empirical research and comparative analysis. On the basis of theoretical analysis, the author puts forward some suggestions on the reform and perfection of the out-of-court investigation system of judges in criminal proceedings in China. This paper is divided into three parts: introduction, text, conclusion. The main body of the article is composed of four parts: the first part is to summarize the relevant content of the criminal judge's out-of-court investigation power, and to make it clear that the judge's out-of-court investigation is a part of the evidence investigation. With the power of criminal jurisdiction, the judge should maintain a neutral attitude in the process of out-court investigation. The second part adopts the method of comparative study, drawing lessons from the design highlights of the judge out of court investigation system in the countries of civil law system and the improvement of the judge out of court investigation under the mixed litigation mode. In order to perfect the out of court investigation system of our country, this paper analyzes the value conflict and balance of the different attitude towards the out of court investigation system of the judge under the different litigation mode, which is different from the out of court inspection procedure of the common law system countries in order to perfect the out of court investigation system of the judge in our country. The third part is to our country judge out of court investigation situation concrete elaboration. This paper analyzes the reasons why the investigation system of judges out of court should be retained in our country, combs the legal evolution of the investigation system of judges out of court in our country, and sums up the concrete contents of the current system of out of court investigation of judges in our country. By analyzing the investigation data, this paper expounds the operation and effect of the out-of-court investigation system of the judges in the criminal first instance procedure of our country's grass-roots courts. The fourth part is to put forward the perfect suggestion to our country criminal judge out of court investigation system. On the basis of empirical research, the author reconstructs the investigation procedure of judges out of court in our country by combining with the merits of the relevant countries in designing and running the investigation system of judges out of court. This paper mainly discusses the initiation of the out-of-court investigation of the judge, the operation of the out-of-court investigation of the judge and the confirmation of the evidence of the out-of-court investigation of the judge.
【學(xué)位授予單位】:西南政法大學(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 劉國慶;;關(guān)于刑訴中法官調(diào)查權(quán)若干問題研究[J];安徽大學(xué)法律評論;2010年01期
2 楊明;王婷婷;;法官庭外調(diào)查權(quán)的理解與適用[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2007年01期
3 陳瑞華;從“流水作業(yè)”走向“以裁判為中心”——對中國刑事司法改革的一種思考[J];法學(xué);2000年03期
4 孫長永;;偵查階段律師辯護(hù)制度立法的三大疑難問題管見[J];法學(xué);2008年07期
5 林鐵軍;;刑事訴訟中法院職權(quán)調(diào)查證據(jù)正當(dāng)性論綱[J];法治研究;2012年01期
6 冉軍;;對我國刑事訴訟中法官“庭外調(diào)查權(quán)”的思考[J];工會論壇(山東省工會管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2008年04期
7 袁春蘭;兩大法系法官查證責(zé)任的比較分析[J];甘肅社會科學(xué);2005年04期
8 李哲;刑事程序公開論[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2004年02期
9 袁春蘭;;論我國法官查證責(zé)任的權(quán)限及基本原則[J];廣州社會主義學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年04期
10 張旭梅;榮國華;陳緒強(qiáng);;論我國刑事訴訟中的法官庭外調(diào)查權(quán)[J];東南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2012年S1期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 陳如超;刑事法官的證據(jù)調(diào)查權(quán)研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年
本文編號:2171925
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2171925.html