審判階段的有效辯護(hù)問題研究
[Abstract]:The trial stage is the legal stage to determine the crime and penalty, and the final stage in which the litigants' rights are publicized. With the advancement of the judicial litigation system reform, the role of trial stage is paid more and more attention, and the measures to protect the rights of the litigants in the trial stage are becoming more and more perfect. Effective defense, as the right running through the whole litigation system, is the key to protect the legal rights of the parties to obtain relief. Especially, the effective defense in the trial stage, as a powerful weapon to protect the legal rights of the accused and counter the public power of the state, has an irreplaceable important role. However, there is a bias between theory and practice in the study of effective defense, too much discussion is focused on the judgment of substantive results, and the discussion of procedure is neglected. The research on effective defense in trial stage is very pale in practice. Just as in the current discussion of "Yu Huan intentional murder," too many comments have been devoted to the specific sentencing of the trial, but few people have paid any attention to the conduct of the defense in the trial. Fewer people judge the legality of the outcome by considering the defense in the trial. We are used to the decisive thinking as power, only notice the final trial results, ignore the process of the defense opinion, see, the trial stage of the effective defense is not enough attention. In fact, in the study of effective defense, there is the same kind of thinking. Scholars have put forward a top-down framework to try to achieve effective defense directly while pursuing the result. However, the construction of such a system essentially ignores the performance of the defendant's litigation status in effective defense, which is a strange mistake of seeking fish. Under this kind of right configuration, the lawyer's right protection is bigger than the litigant's right relief, the judge's trial has become the completion work flow design. In practice, lawyers pay too much attention to the protection of their own rights, lack of attention to the parties in their work, which leads to the parties' lack of understanding of the defense behavior, and even directly loses the trust of the parties; the judge is a mere formality in the trial work. Ignore the party's defense opinion, even lack of correct treatment, resulting in a decline in judicial credibility. Effective defense has become a theoretical state of necessity, has not played a substantive role, has little influence in the trial stage, and the rights of suspects and defendants can not be protected. The author thinks that the research of effective defense should proceed from practice, analyze and discuss with the center of the parties, construct the concept of effective defense with a unified understanding, determine the status of the litigant's main body of action, and set up the mechanism of the lawyer's right to take the party as the center. To regulate lawyers' defense, to ensure the procedural rights of the parties, to regulate the judges' right to judge to punish crimes and protect human rights, and to enhance the influence of effective defense in substantive adjudication. To achieve the goal of "let the masses feel fair and just in every judicial case" (1).
【學(xué)位授予單位】:貴州師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】:碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】:2017
【分類號】:D925.2
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 梁鴻飛;;中國語境:關(guān)于司法公信問題的法理省察[J];長白學(xué)刊;2017年01期
2 顧永忠;;以審判為中心背景下的刑事辯護(hù)突出問題研究[J];中國法學(xué);2016年02期
3 陳衛(wèi)東;;當(dāng)前司法改革的特點(diǎn)與難點(diǎn)[J];湖南社會(huì)科學(xué);2016年02期
4 卞建林;謝澍;;“以審判為中心”視野下的訴訟關(guān)系[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2016年01期
5 陳光中;樊崇義;陳國慶;張相軍;苗生明;王新環(huán);鄒開紅;張志銘;楊春雷;卞建林;;以審判為中心與檢察工作[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2016年01期
6 高子程;盧建平;陳瑞華;;以審判為中心的訴訟制度改革:律師的職業(yè)定位[J];中國法律評論;2016年01期
7 顧永忠;;淺談《關(guān)于依法保障律師執(zhí)業(yè)權(quán)利的規(guī)定》的特點(diǎn)、效力及貫徹執(zhí)行[J];中國司法;2015年11期
8 陳衛(wèi)東;;全面保障律師執(zhí)業(yè)權(quán)利的重大舉措[J];中國律師;2015年10期
9 卞建林;王進(jìn)喜;陳衛(wèi)東;王新清;;依法保障律師執(zhí)業(yè)權(quán)利專家筆談[J];中國司法;2015年10期
10 陳瑞華;;法官責(zé)任制度的三種模式[J];法學(xué)研究;2015年04期
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 艾超;辯護(hù)權(quán)研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2010年
,本文編號:2200273
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2200273.html