【摘要】： 在刑事偵查過(guò)程中,國(guó)家偵查機(jī)關(guān)往往需要用利用各種措施來(lái)查明案件事實(shí),尋找事件的真相。在強(qiáng)大的國(guó)家權(quán)力面前,犯罪嫌疑人就顯得更加弱小,加之我國(guó)對(duì)犯罪嫌疑人權(quán)利保障機(jī)制的缺失,就將其置于更為不利的境地。在司法實(shí)踐中,刑訊逼供屢禁不止,冤假錯(cuò)案比比皆是,先有杜培武,后有佘祥林,這一次次血的教訓(xùn)讓我們逐漸意識(shí)到犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障的重要性。 本文立足于我國(guó)犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障的現(xiàn)狀,力圖借鑒國(guó)內(nèi)外有關(guān)犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障理論的寶貴經(jīng)驗(yàn),在比較分析的基礎(chǔ)上,提出了完善我國(guó)犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障機(jī)制的一些建議。 本文共分為四個(gè)部分: 第一章首先介紹了人權(quán)概念的基本含義、形成和發(fā)展,揭示出人權(quán)保障具有悠久的歷史。人權(quán)保障理論起源于西方資產(chǎn)階級(jí)的革命勝利,并隨著社會(huì)的發(fā)展,人權(quán)保障的內(nèi)容不斷的充實(shí)。個(gè)人權(quán)利、集體權(quán)利、民族權(quán)利成為當(dāng)代人權(quán)不可分割的組成部分。接著分析了刑事偵查階段中犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障的主要特征;最后闡述了國(guó)際公約中關(guān)于犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障的有關(guān)規(guī)定,主要包括享有人道待遇的權(quán)利;禁止任意和非法羈押的權(quán)利;獲得律師幫助的權(quán)利;享有司法救濟(jì)的權(quán)利等。 第二章介紹了英美法系、大陸法系下犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障的模式。大陸法系的基本理念是發(fā)現(xiàn)實(shí)體真實(shí)。強(qiáng)調(diào)的是偵查機(jī)關(guān)單方面的權(quán)力行使,輕視犯罪嫌疑人的權(quán)利,甚至把犯罪嫌疑人完全看作是偵查的客體。英美法系出于正當(dāng)程序的要求,重視犯罪嫌疑人的權(quán)利保障,把犯罪嫌疑人作為與偵查機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)等的偵查主體看待。在分析比較中,總結(jié)出兩大法系關(guān)于人權(quán)保障方面的一些我們可以借鑒的經(jīng)驗(yàn),并且介紹了我國(guó)刑事偵查程序中人權(quán)保障制度的現(xiàn)狀和存在的不足。旨在引起讀者對(duì)我國(guó)犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障制度的深刻思考。 第三章論述了偵查階段犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障的理論基礎(chǔ)和重要性。由于刑事訴訟的本質(zhì)是政府與個(gè)人之間的沖突。在偵查實(shí)踐中,偵控機(jī)關(guān)經(jīng)常任意剝奪犯罪嫌疑人個(gè)人的自由和財(cái)產(chǎn),使得這種沖突變得更加尖銳。所以限制政府權(quán)力,保障犯罪嫌疑人的人權(quán)對(duì)我國(guó)的刑事司法改革具有重要的意義。 第四章結(jié)合我國(guó)實(shí)際情況,對(duì)健全和完善我國(guó)刑事偵查程序中犯罪嫌疑人的人權(quán)保障制度進(jìn)行了探討。主要包括賦予犯罪嫌疑人沉默權(quán);建立強(qiáng)制偵查權(quán)的司法審查制度;建立保釋制度;強(qiáng)化律師的辯護(hù)權(quán)等。 通過(guò)全文論述,文章最后指出隨著我國(guó)社會(huì)結(jié)構(gòu)的轉(zhuǎn)型、對(duì)外開(kāi)放程度的擴(kuò)大以及法制改革的深入,我們必然能從單一的犯罪控制的觀念中走出來(lái),積極限制強(qiáng)大的司法權(quán)力,建立切實(shí)有效的監(jiān)督機(jī)制。使犯罪嫌疑人的人權(quán)保障機(jī)制更加健全。
[Abstract]:In the process of criminal investigation, the national investigative organs often need to use various measures to find out the facts of the case and to find out the truth of the incident. In the face of the powerful state power, the criminal suspect appears weaker and weaker, and the lack of the guarantee mechanism of the criminal suspect's rights in our country puts it in a more disadvantageous position. In judicial practice, extorting confessions by torture does not stop despite repeated prohibitions, and there are many cases of injustice, falsehood and error, first du Peiwu, then she Xianglin. This bloody lesson has made us gradually realize the importance of protecting the human rights of criminal suspects. Based on the current situation of human rights protection of criminal suspects in China, this paper tries to draw lessons from the valuable experience of human rights protection theory of criminal suspects at home and abroad, on the basis of comparative analysis. Some suggestions are put forward to perfect the human rights guarantee mechanism of criminal suspects in China. This paper is divided into four parts: the first chapter introduces the basic meaning, formation and development of the concept of human rights, and reveals that human rights protection has a long history. The theory of human rights guarantee originates from the victory of the western bourgeoisie revolution, and with the development of society, the content of human rights protection is constantly enriched. Individual rights, collective rights and national rights have become an integral part of contemporary human rights. Then it analyzes the main characteristics of the human rights guarantee of criminal suspects in the criminal investigation stage, and finally expounds the relevant provisions of the international conventions on the human rights protection of criminal suspects, including the right to enjoy humane treatment. The right to prohibit arbitrary and illegal detention; the right to a lawyer; the right to judicial remedies, etc. The second chapter introduces the mode of human rights protection of criminal suspects in Anglo-American law system and civil law system. The basic idea of the civil law system is to discover the entity truth. It emphasizes the unilateral exercise of the power of the investigative organ, despises the rights of the criminal suspect, and even regards the suspect as the object of investigation. Due to the requirement of due process, the Anglo-American legal system attaches importance to the protection of the criminal suspect's rights and regards the suspect as the subject of investigation which is equivalent to the investigative organ. In the analysis and comparison, we summarize some experiences on human rights protection in the two legal systems, and introduce the present situation and shortcomings of human rights protection system in criminal investigation procedure in our country. The aim is to arouse readers' deep thinking on the human rights guarantee system of our country's criminal suspects. The third chapter discusses the theoretical basis and importance of human rights protection of criminal suspects. Because the essence of criminal proceedings is the conflict between government and individual. In the investigation practice, the investigation and control organ often arbitrarily deprives the suspect of his personal liberty and property, which makes the conflict more acute. Therefore, restricting the power of the government and protecting the human rights of criminal suspects is of great significance to the criminal justice reform in our country. The fourth chapter discusses how to perfect and perfect the human rights guarantee system of criminal suspects in criminal investigation procedure according to the actual situation of our country. It mainly includes giving criminal suspects the right to silence; establishing a judicial review system of compulsory investigation power; establishing bail system; strengthening lawyers' right to defense and so on. Through the full text discussion, the article finally points out that with the transformation of China's social structure, the expansion of opening up and the deepening of the legal system reform, we must be able to step out of the single concept of crime control and actively restrict the powerful judicial power. Establish an effective supervision mechanism. To make the human rights protection mechanism of criminal suspects more sound.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2007
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李青松;關(guān)于對(duì)建立我國(guó)刑事強(qiáng)制措施司法審查制度的思考[J];安徽電力職工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2001年02期

2 劉根菊;沉默權(quán)與嚴(yán)禁刑訊逼供[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年04期

3 趙世義;關(guān)于人權(quán)理論問(wèn)題的幾點(diǎn)思考[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1997年05期

4 葉青;中英未成年犯罪嫌疑人、被告人適用保釋之比較研究[J];青少年犯罪問(wèn)題;2002年03期

5 蔡杰,肖萍;我國(guó)偵查程序引入對(duì)抗制之必要性——對(duì)我國(guó)偵查模式的反思[J];中國(guó)人民公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2004年01期

6 孫長(zhǎng)永;高峰;;刑事偵查中的司法令狀制度探析[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2006年02期

7 姜煥強(qiáng),楊清良;我國(guó)律師刑事辯護(hù)制度研究[J];河北法學(xué);2005年02期

8 成鳳明;何春華;;論我國(guó)刑事偵查權(quán)的司法控制[J];時(shí)代法學(xué);2006年06期

9 徐玲利;論刑事司法國(guó)際標(biāo)準(zhǔn)與國(guó)內(nèi)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的沖突與協(xié)調(diào)[J];檢察實(shí)踐;2004年03期

10 遲松劍;刑事偵查中犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障研究[J];北京人民警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年01期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前9條

1 張淑玲;非法證據(jù)的效力問(wèn)題研究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2001年

2 劉高;我國(guó)犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障制度疏略[D];湘潭大學(xué);2003年

3 秦升明;論偵查階段犯罪嫌疑人獲得律師辨護(hù)權(quán)[D];安徽大學(xué);2004年

4 孫晶;論偵查階段犯罪嫌疑人的權(quán)利保護(hù)[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2004年

5 李戰(zhàn)亞;公安機(jī)關(guān)刑事偵查階段犯罪嫌疑人人權(quán)保障問(wèn)題研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2005年

6 王宏;論偵查階段對(duì)犯罪嫌疑人權(quán)利的保障[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

7 侯明;偵查權(quán)的司法控制探究[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2006年

8 楊琳;論刑事偵查程序中犯罪嫌疑人的人權(quán)保障[D];鄭州大學(xué);2006年

9 關(guān)倚琴;論犯罪嫌疑人知悉權(quán)[D];西南政法大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：2260209