檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴程序規(guī)制研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-12-12 07:50
【摘要】：檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴,是指刑事案件被提起公訴之后,檢察機關(guān)發(fā)現(xiàn)案件存在不必要起訴或不應(yīng)當(dāng)起訴的法定情形時,主動將業(yè)已提起的公訴進行撤回。這是以檢察機關(guān)擁有相對充分的自由裁量權(quán)為前提的,是現(xiàn)代刑事司法體系的重要環(huán)節(jié),有利于實現(xiàn)刑事訴訟的高效與公正,節(jié)約訴訟資源,保障刑事訴訟當(dāng)事人的正當(dāng)權(quán)益。檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴問題在我國現(xiàn)行《刑事訴訟法》中沒有明確規(guī)定,僅僅在最高人民檢察院和最高人民法院的司法解釋中有所涉及。我國1979年《刑事訴訟法》曾對該制度有過明確的設(shè)定,但自從1996年《刑事訴訟法》將其廢除以來,一度引起了學(xué)者們對檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度存與廢的爭論。直至2013年新《刑事訴訟法》實施以來,依然沒能將該制度明確寫入其中,加上兩高司法解釋的規(guī)定也不夠細(xì)致全面,使得當(dāng)前對該制度的質(zhì)疑之聲越來越強烈。正是由于我國撤回公訴制度在立法上長期處于缺位狀態(tài)且在司法解釋中的規(guī)定過于粗疏和不完備,缺乏一定的可操作性,才導(dǎo)致司法實踐中一直存在著適用程序混亂、操作違法、缺乏監(jiān)督制約等各種缺陷和弊端。所造成的危害不僅僅是當(dāng)事人的正當(dāng)訴訟權(quán)益得不到保障,還動搖了刑事司法的威嚴(yán),破壞了司法的公正性。因此從多方面對我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度進行程序規(guī)制就顯得十分必要。本文分為三個部分,對我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度在理論和實務(wù)中存在的爭議和問題進行探討,進一步分析存在這些爭議和問題的原因,從而加強和完善我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度的程序規(guī)制,以期更好地指導(dǎo)和服務(wù)于刑事司法活動。第一部分是對我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度的總體概述。首先介紹我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度的性質(zhì)和理論基礎(chǔ);其次對我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度存與廢的各種爭論進行分析;最后評析我國設(shè)立撤回公訴制度的價值。第二部分主要是對我國撤回公訴制度在司法實踐中存在的問題及其成因進行分析。透過我國撤回公訴制度的實踐現(xiàn)狀,從典型案例出發(fā),來探析撤回公訴制度在我國司法實踐中存在的諸多不規(guī)范問題,進而對這些問題的成因進行分析。第三部分是完善我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度的具體對策。在人權(quán)保障、程序法治、訴訟經(jīng)濟等思想的指導(dǎo)下,分別從撤回公訴程序規(guī)制的條件、審查的主體、審查的程序、決定程序、異議和救濟程序以及監(jiān)督和制約程序等方面對我國檢察機關(guān)撤回公訴制度進行程序規(guī)制。
[Abstract]:The procuratorial organ withdraws the public prosecution, refers to after the criminal case is prosecuted, the procuratorial organ discovers the case to have the unnecessary prosecution or should not sue the legal situation, the initiative carries on the withdrawal which has already initiated the public prosecution. This is based on the premise that procuratorial organs have relatively sufficient discretion, which is an important link in the modern criminal justice system, which is conducive to the realization of high efficiency and justice in criminal proceedings, the saving of litigation resources, and the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties in criminal proceedings. The withdrawal of public prosecution by procuratorial organs is not clearly stipulated in the present Criminal procedure Law of China, but only in the judicial interpretation of the Supreme people's Procuratorate and the Supreme people's Court. China's Criminal procedure Law in 1979 had a clear set of the system, but since the abolition of the Criminal procedure Law in 1996, scholars once caused the procuratorial organs to withdraw the public prosecution system of the existence or abolition of controversy. Since the implementation of the new Criminal procedure Law in 2013, the new Criminal procedure Law has still failed to explicitly include the system, and the provisions of the two high judicial interpretations are not sufficiently detailed and comprehensive, which makes the voices of questioning the system more and more intense. It is precisely because our country withdraws the public prosecution system in the legislation for a long time in the vacancy state, the stipulation in the judicial interpretation is too careless and incomplete, lacks certain maneuverability, just causes the judicial practice to have the application procedure confusion all the time. Illegal operation, lack of supervision and restriction and other defects and drawbacks. The harm caused is not only that the litigants' rights and interests can not be guaranteed, but also shakes the prestige of criminal justice and undermines the justice of justice. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate the withdrawal of public prosecution system from many aspects. This paper is divided into three parts to discuss the disputes and problems existing in the theory and practice of the public prosecution system withdrawn by procuratorial organs in China, and to further analyze the reasons for these disputes and problems. In order to better guide and serve the criminal justice activities, we should strengthen and perfect the procedural regulation of procuratorial organ withdrawing public prosecution system in our country. The first part is the general summary of the procuratorial organ withdrawing the public prosecution system in our country. This paper first introduces the nature and theoretical basis of the withdrawal of public prosecution system by procuratorial organs in China; secondly, analyzes the various arguments about the existence and abolition of the withdrawal of public prosecution system by procuratorial organs in China; finally, evaluates the value of setting up the system of withdrawing public prosecution in our country. The second part mainly analyzes the problems and causes of withdrawing public prosecution system in judicial practice. Through the practice situation of withdrawing the public prosecution system in our country, from the typical cases, this paper probes into many non-standard problems existing in the judicial practice of withdrawing the public prosecution system in our country, and then analyzes the causes of these problems. The third part is to perfect our country procuratorial organ withdraws the public prosecution system concrete countermeasure. Under the guidance of the ideas of human rights protection, procedural rule of law, litigation economy and so on, respectively, from the conditions of withdrawing the regulation of public prosecution procedure, the subject of examination, the procedure of examination, and determining the procedure, Dissent and relief procedure, supervision and restriction procedure, etc., regulate the withdrawal of public prosecution system by procuratorial organs in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2
本文編號：2374216
[Abstract]:The procuratorial organ withdraws the public prosecution, refers to after the criminal case is prosecuted, the procuratorial organ discovers the case to have the unnecessary prosecution or should not sue the legal situation, the initiative carries on the withdrawal which has already initiated the public prosecution. This is based on the premise that procuratorial organs have relatively sufficient discretion, which is an important link in the modern criminal justice system, which is conducive to the realization of high efficiency and justice in criminal proceedings, the saving of litigation resources, and the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the parties in criminal proceedings. The withdrawal of public prosecution by procuratorial organs is not clearly stipulated in the present Criminal procedure Law of China, but only in the judicial interpretation of the Supreme people's Procuratorate and the Supreme people's Court. China's Criminal procedure Law in 1979 had a clear set of the system, but since the abolition of the Criminal procedure Law in 1996, scholars once caused the procuratorial organs to withdraw the public prosecution system of the existence or abolition of controversy. Since the implementation of the new Criminal procedure Law in 2013, the new Criminal procedure Law has still failed to explicitly include the system, and the provisions of the two high judicial interpretations are not sufficiently detailed and comprehensive, which makes the voices of questioning the system more and more intense. It is precisely because our country withdraws the public prosecution system in the legislation for a long time in the vacancy state, the stipulation in the judicial interpretation is too careless and incomplete, lacks certain maneuverability, just causes the judicial practice to have the application procedure confusion all the time. Illegal operation, lack of supervision and restriction and other defects and drawbacks. The harm caused is not only that the litigants' rights and interests can not be guaranteed, but also shakes the prestige of criminal justice and undermines the justice of justice. Therefore, it is necessary to regulate the withdrawal of public prosecution system from many aspects. This paper is divided into three parts to discuss the disputes and problems existing in the theory and practice of the public prosecution system withdrawn by procuratorial organs in China, and to further analyze the reasons for these disputes and problems. In order to better guide and serve the criminal justice activities, we should strengthen and perfect the procedural regulation of procuratorial organ withdrawing public prosecution system in our country. The first part is the general summary of the procuratorial organ withdrawing the public prosecution system in our country. This paper first introduces the nature and theoretical basis of the withdrawal of public prosecution system by procuratorial organs in China; secondly, analyzes the various arguments about the existence and abolition of the withdrawal of public prosecution system by procuratorial organs in China; finally, evaluates the value of setting up the system of withdrawing public prosecution in our country. The second part mainly analyzes the problems and causes of withdrawing public prosecution system in judicial practice. Through the practice situation of withdrawing the public prosecution system in our country, from the typical cases, this paper probes into many non-standard problems existing in the judicial practice of withdrawing the public prosecution system in our country, and then analyzes the causes of these problems. The third part is to perfect our country procuratorial organ withdraws the public prosecution system concrete countermeasure. Under the guidance of the ideas of human rights protection, procedural rule of law, litigation economy and so on, respectively, from the conditions of withdrawing the regulation of public prosecution procedure, the subject of examination, the procedure of examination, and determining the procedure, Dissent and relief procedure, supervision and restriction procedure, etc., regulate the withdrawal of public prosecution system by procuratorial organs in our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(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】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條
1 李莉;劉冰;萬偉嶺;;公訴撤回起訴案件的優(yōu)化[J];中國檢察官;2013年10期
2 申文寬;;論檢察機關(guān)撤回起訴的法律效力[J];法學(xué)雜志;2013年04期
3 邢永杰;侯曉焱;;撤回公訴問題評析[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年02期
4 黃河;史衛(wèi)忠;呂衛(wèi)華;;刑事訴訟規(guī)則在公訴工作中的理解與適用[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年01期
5 何成林;范水姣;張文娟;;檢察機關(guān)撤回起訴的法律效力初探[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(下旬);2012年10期
6 余經(jīng)林;;論撤回公訴[J];法學(xué)評論;2007年01期
7 張小玲;;試論公訴撤回制度[J];中國人民公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2006年02期
8 劉繼國;刑事訴訟中撤回公訴問題研究[J];人民檢察;2004年01期
9 林勁松;論撤回公訴[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報;2003年01期
相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前2條
1 萬毅;;撤回起訴效力三問[N];檢察日報;2011年
2 宋飛;;淺析撤回起訴的性質(zhì)[N];法制日報;2004年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條
1 張阿麗;論公訴案件的撤回起訴[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2012年
2 唐韌;公訴案件撤回起訴制度研究[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2011年
3 朱思思;檢察機關(guān)撤回起訴問題研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2011年
，本文編號：2374216
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2374216.html
