本文選題：特別刑事程序 + 貪污賄賂犯罪�。� 參考：《湖南大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：沒收違法所得特別程序是指在貪污賄賂犯罪、恐怖活動犯罪等重大犯罪案件中，犯罪嫌疑人、被告人死亡、逃匿的情況下，經(jīng)人民檢察院向法院申請，依照法定程序沒收其違法所得及其他涉案財產(chǎn)。該程序彌補了之前法律對于犯罪嫌疑人、被告人死亡、逃匿后對其財產(chǎn)處理的漏洞與不足，是對我國現(xiàn)有法律體系完善的有益探索和實踐，保證任何違法者不得從其違法行為中獲益，同時，為我國司法機關(guān)向他國請求協(xié)助提供了依據(jù)，也為司法機關(guān)對違法所得的追繳掃除了障礙，彰顯了國家打擊腐敗犯罪的堅定決心，一定程度上實現(xiàn)了社會正義。 由于法律規(guī)范尚有不足，沒收違法所得特別程序存在適用條件不規(guī)范、適用范圍過于狹窄、沒收對象中對孳息的范圍認定不明、救濟措施不完善等問題，尤其是沒收違法所得特別程序的證明規(guī)則模糊不清，其應(yīng)當適用普通刑事訴訟中普通證明規(guī)則，還是應(yīng)當作為特別程序適用特別的證明規(guī)則，法律缺乏的明確規(guī)定。相比于外國刑事訴訟中對違法財產(chǎn)的處置程序，，在程序的啟動，程序的適用范圍，沒收的對象以及證明標準上都有許多值得我們借鑒和學習的地方。因此我國在適用沒收違法所得特別程序的過程中，應(yīng)當通過保障犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的抗辯權(quán)以及申訴權(quán)來加強對犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的保護，在程序的具體設(shè)計上，應(yīng)當明確沒收違法所得特別程序的適用條件，適當拓寬沒收違法所得特別程序的適用范圍，同時針對沒收違法所得特別程序不同的沒收對象實行不同的沒收原則，明確沒收違法所得特別程序的證明規(guī)則，根據(jù)證明對象的不同采取二元化的證明責任和證明標準，以達到對沒收違法所得特別程序的完善和合理使用。
[Abstract]:The special procedure for confiscation of illegal proceeds means that in major criminal cases such as embezzlement, bribery, terrorist activities, and other major criminal cases, when a criminal suspect or defendant dies or escapes from hiding, he shall apply to the court by the people's Procuratorate. His illegal gains and other property involved in the case shall be confiscated in accordance with legal procedures. This procedure has made up for the loopholes and deficiencies of the previous law in dealing with the property of criminal suspects and defendants after they have died, and is a useful exploration and practice for the perfection of the existing legal system of our country. Ensuring that no violator may benefit from the violation of the law, at the same time providing a basis for our judicial organs to request assistance from other countries and removing obstacles to the recovery of illegal proceeds by the judicial authorities, Demonstrates the country's firm determination to combat corruption, to a certain extent to achieve social justice. Due to the lack of legal norms, the special procedures for confiscation of illegal income have some problems, such as non-standard conditions of application, too narrow scope of application, unclear identification of the scope of fruits in confiscation objects, imperfect relief measures, and so on. In particular, the rules of proof of the special procedures for confiscation of illegal gains are ambiguous, and should they be applied to the ordinary rules of proof in ordinary criminal proceedings, or should they be applied as special rules of proof by special procedures, which are not clearly stipulated in the law. Compared with the disposal procedure of illegal property in foreign criminal proceedings, there are a lot of places that we should learn from and learn from in the starting of the procedure, the scope of application of the procedure, the object of confiscation and the standard of proof. Therefore, in the course of applying the special procedure of confiscation of illegal proceeds, our country should strengthen the protection of criminal suspects and defendants through the protection of criminal suspects, defendants' right of defense and the right of appeal, and the specific design of the procedures. The conditions for the special procedure for the confiscation of illegal proceeds should be clarified, the scope of application of the special procedure for the confiscation of illegal proceeds should be broadened as appropriate, and different confiscation principles should be applied to different confiscation objects of the special procedure for the confiscation of illegal proceeds, In order to achieve the perfect and reasonable use of the special procedure for confiscation of illegal income, the proof rules of special procedure for confiscation of illegal income should be made clear, and dualistic burden of proof and standard of proof should be adopted according to the different object of proof.
【學位授予單位】：湖南大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924.1

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉根菊,李秀娟;構(gòu)建缺席審判外逃貪官制度探析[J];人民檢察;2005年16期

2 黃風;梁文鈞;;英國《2002年犯罪收益(追繳)法》中的民事追繳制度[J];人民檢察;2008年03期

3 陳衛(wèi)東;;論新《刑事訴訟法》中的判決前財產(chǎn)沒收程序[J];法學論壇;2012年03期

4 宋英輝;茹艷紅;;刑事訴訟特別程序立法釋評[J];蘇州大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2012年02期

5 毛興勤;;構(gòu)建證明標準的背景與思路:以違法所得沒收程序為中心[J];法學論壇;2013年02期

6 吳光升;;未定罪案件涉案財物沒收程序之若干比較——以美國聯(lián)邦民事沒收程序為比較視角[J];中國政法大學學報;2013年02期

7 周曉永;;檢察機關(guān)適用違法所得特別沒收程序的思考[J];人民檢察;2013年06期

8 陳衛(wèi)東;;構(gòu)建中國特色刑事特別程序[J];中國法學;2011年06期

9 吳光升;;我國違法所得沒收程序的若干檢討——基于2012年《刑事訴訟法》相關(guān)規(guī)定的分析[J];浙江工商大學學報;2012年03期

10 盧樂云;;我國特別沒收程序與《聯(lián)合國反腐敗公約》之銜接[J];中共中央黨校學報;2012年05期

本文編號：1900549