【摘要】：逮捕是最嚴(yán)厲的刑事強制措施,嚴(yán)厲性體現(xiàn)在司法機關(guān)在法定期限內(nèi)依法剝奪犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的人身自由并進行羈押審查。由于逮捕的羈押期限相對較長,可以有效地保證刑事訴訟活動的順利進行,為公安機關(guān)查清案件真實和懲處犯罪分子提供了時間保障,因而為公安機關(guān)所青睞,將不捕率的高低作為考核辦案質(zhì)量的一個重要標(biāo)準(zhǔn),而逮捕措施的消極作用也彰顯無遺,一旦錯捕則嚴(yán)重侵犯公民合法權(quán)益,面臨國家賠償壓力。審查逮捕成為檢察機關(guān)履行偵查監(jiān)督職能保障公民人權(quán)的關(guān)鍵環(huán)節(jié),而不批準(zhǔn)逮捕更是由于體現(xiàn)控制犯罪與保障人權(quán)矛盾的直接沖突而備受關(guān)注,成為偵、檢、辯、被害人四方審前博弈的焦點。 任何不捕案件的出現(xiàn),都是公安機關(guān)的積極訴求和檢察機關(guān)的審慎審查的沖突結(jié)果,也是在查處犯罪過程中檢警雙方最大的分歧所在,如何在打擊犯罪和保障人權(quán)中尋求平衡,統(tǒng)一公安、檢察執(zhí)法標(biāo)準(zhǔn),提高司法公信力是本文選題的切入點。本文以鶴城區(qū)檢察院2013年審查逮捕案件為例,提出不批準(zhǔn)逮捕決定的正面效應(yīng),包括有利于貫徹寬嚴(yán)相濟刑事政策,有利于減少司法資源浪費,有利于防范錯案,分析檢察機關(guān)作出不批準(zhǔn)逮捕決定面臨的問題,包括：權(quán)力監(jiān)督、救濟體系不完善,公安、檢察機關(guān)執(zhí)法標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一,不批準(zhǔn)逮捕決定作出后的監(jiān)督有配套制度執(zhí)行不到位等,提出完善對策,包括：統(tǒng)一不批準(zhǔn)逮捕決定的適用標(biāo)準(zhǔn),加強對不批準(zhǔn)逮捕定的后續(xù)跟蹤監(jiān)督,如引導(dǎo)存疑不捕案件偵查取證,將構(gòu)罪不捕案件嫌疑人納入社區(qū)矯正范圍,完善取保候?qū)彵O(jiān)督執(zhí)行體系,完善對不批準(zhǔn)逮捕決定的制約體系,如建立不批準(zhǔn)逮捕案件雙向說理制度、有異議不批準(zhǔn)逮捕案件公開聽證制度、科學(xué)有效的錯案責(zé)任追究機制,立足解決司法實踐中遇到的實際問題,促進司法公平公正。
[Abstract]:Arrest is the most severe criminal coercive measure, which is reflected in the judicial organs depriving the criminal suspects and defendants of their personal liberty and conducting the detention examination within the legal time limit. As the detention period of arrest is relatively long, it can effectively ensure the smooth progress of criminal proceedings, and provide a time guarantee for the public security organs to find out the truth of the case and punish the criminals, so it is favored by the public security organs. The level of non-arrest rate is regarded as an important standard to assess the quality of handling cases, and the negative effect of arrest measures is also highlighted. Once the wrong arrest seriously infringes on the legitimate rights and interests of citizens, it faces the pressure of state compensation. Examining and arresting has become a key link for procuratorial organs to perform the function of investigation and supervision to protect citizens' human rights. However, the disapproval of arrest has attracted much attention because of the direct conflict between crime control and protection of human rights. It has become an investigation, a procurator, and a defense. The focus of the four-party pretrial game of the victim. The appearance of any non-arrest case is the result of the positive demands of the public security organs and the careful examination of the procuratorial organs. It is also the biggest difference between the prosecution and the police in the process of investigating and dealing with crimes. How to strike a balance between the fight against crime and the protection of human rights, Unifying public security, procuratorial law enforcement standard and improving judicial credibility are the entry point of this paper. Taking the case of arrest examined by Hecheng District Procuratorate in 2013 as an example, this paper points out the positive effects of disapproval of arrest decision, including the implementation of the criminal policy of combining leniency and severity, the reduction of the waste of judicial resources, and the prevention of wrong cases. Analyzing the problems faced by procuratorial organs in making the decision not to approve arrest, including: power supervision, imperfect relief system, different standards of law enforcement by public security and procuratorial organs, supervision after disapproval of arrest decision, etc. Put forward the perfect countermeasure, including: unifying the applicable standard of the non-approval arrest decision, strengthening the follow up supervision of the disapproval arrest decision, such as guiding the suspect to investigate and collect the evidence, bringing the suspect of the constitution crime and not arresting the case into the scope of community correction, To improve the execution system of bail pending trial supervision, to perfect the restriction system on the decision to disapprove arrest, such as establishing a two-way reasoning system for disapproving arrest cases, a public hearing system for disapproving arrest cases, and a scientific and effective mechanism for investigating the responsibility for wrongful cases, To solve the practical problems in judicial practice and promote judicial fairness and justice.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南師范大學(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】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 嚴(yán)勵;司法權(quán)威初論[J];中國司法;2004年06期

2 孫笑俠;法律程序剖析[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報);1993年06期

3 周偉;保釋解讀與我國取保候?qū)徶贫雀母颷J];法學(xué);2004年12期

4 王晨光;法律運行中的不確定性與“錯案追究制”的誤區(qū)[J];法學(xué);1997年03期

5 左寧;;建構(gòu)檢察機關(guān)對不批準(zhǔn)逮捕決定執(zhí)行情況的跟蹤監(jiān)督機制[J];河南公安高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2008年03期

6 劉計劃;;逮捕審查制度的中國模式及其改革[J];法學(xué)研究;2012年02期

7 張晶;周芳建;;淺議不批準(zhǔn)逮捕的適用條件及其完善[J];湖北第二師范學(xué)院學(xué)報;2011年07期

8 房國賓;;審前羈押定期復(fù)查制度:透析與前瞻[J];前沿;2010年05期

9 張清鴻,茆素青;不批準(zhǔn)逮捕決定應(yīng)告知被害人[J];人民檢察;2005年13期

10 艾建國;閆俊瑛;;和諧視野中的審查逮捕機制優(yōu)化——輕刑公訴案件中逮捕適用情況的調(diào)查分析[J];人民檢察;2006年04期

，

本文編號：2256954