本文選題：酷刑 + 比較��； 參考：《湘潭大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：酷刑是全人類的公敵，闡明酷刑的概念是對酷刑進行研究的前提。從犯罪歸屬來看，酷刑既可以是國內(nèi)犯罪也可以是國際犯罪，有鑒于此，由于國內(nèi)外對于酷刑認識的不同，故而對于酷刑的定義就存在著不同之處。如果想要對酷刑有一個全面而客觀的認知，則需要對國內(nèi)外各種酷刑的概念進行比較研究及分析。 對各種有關酷刑的規(guī)定的分析研究，首先離不開對于酷刑概念有較大影響力的國際法律文件的研究，因為當前多數(shù)酷刑概念都是以這些國際性法律文件為基礎而進行規(guī)定的。通過對相關公約的介紹，可以使我們對酷刑的概念有一個初步的認識。同時酷刑也是被世界上大多數(shù)國家的法律所禁止的，比較典型的主要有德國、法國、日本等國的相關立法，對這些國家立法例的研究，有利于對酷刑進行較為全面的認識，更好的對酷刑的定義進行理解。 僅僅從字面上對酷刑進行理解是不夠的，對一個概念的理解應當從多種角度進行分析，比較研究法、歷史研究法、價值分析等研究方法是全面認識酷刑的重要手段，同時通過宏觀審視與微觀剖析相結(jié)合,才能對酷刑下一個精確的定義。通過對相關公約和立法例的比較研究，可以發(fā)現(xiàn)它們對于酷刑的規(guī)定的不同之處，存在的合理性與不合理性；從歷史的角度來說，每個國家對自己的法律進程都是一個歷史的選擇，不同國家對于酷刑不同的規(guī)定也是在這一社會背景下產(chǎn)生的，同時不同的社會價值體系也對酷刑的認識有著不同的影響。在充分考慮這些影響的前提下，比較分析各酷刑的概念，發(fā)現(xiàn)其中的優(yōu)缺點、合理與不合理之處，去粗取精得出酷刑的定義并明確其內(nèi)涵與外延才是目的之所在，，也能為禁止酷刑制度的構建奠定理論基礎。 中國對于酷刑的研究起步較晚，目前對于酷刑定義沒有一個統(tǒng)一的認識，但是酷刑在司法領域時有發(fā)生。雖然中國法律界作了很大的努力,不僅從法律上對酷刑有所限制，還主動接受國際法的監(jiān)督，簽訂了一系列條約，但是歷史的慣性使酷刑的全面禁止難以一墩而就，中國反酷刑的道路道阻且長。明確酷刑的定義是反酷刑的開端，也決定著反酷刑的命運。我們翹首以待。
[Abstract]:Torture is the public enemy of all mankind, and clarifying the concept of torture is the premise of the study of torture. From the view of crime attribution, torture can be both domestic crime and international crime. In view of this, because of the different understanding of torture at home and abroad, there are differences in the definition of torture. If we want to have a comprehensive and objective understanding of torture, we need to make a comparative study and analysis of various concepts of torture at home and abroad. The analysis and study of various provisions on torture can not be separated from the study of international legal documents which have great influence on the concept of torture, because most of the current concepts of torture are established on the basis of these international legal documents. Through the introduction of relevant conventions, we can have a preliminary understanding of the concept of torture. At the same time, torture is also prohibited by the laws of most countries in the world. Typical examples are mainly the relevant legislation of Germany, France, Japan, and other countries. The study of the legislative cases of these countries is conducive to a more comprehensive understanding of torture. Better understand the definition of torture. It is not enough to understand torture literally. The understanding of a concept should be analyzed from a variety of angles, such as comparative research, historical research, value analysis and so on. At the same time, through the combination of macro-examination and micro-analysis, a precise definition of torture can be made. Through a comparative study of the relevant conventions and legislative cases, we can find that their provisions on torture are different, the rationality and irrationality of their existence; from the historical point of view, Each country is a historical choice to its own legal process. Different countries have different regulations on torture under this social background. At the same time, different social value systems also have different influence on the understanding of torture. On the premise of fully considering these effects, the concepts of torture are compared and analyzed, and the advantages and disadvantages, reasonableness and unreasonableness of them are found. The definition of torture and its connotation and extension are the purpose of the definition of torture. It can also lay a theoretical foundation for the construction of the prohibition of torture system. The study of torture in China started late, and there is no unified understanding of the definition of torture at present, but torture occurs from time to time in the judicial field. Although the Chinese legal profession has made great efforts not only to restrict torture legally, but also to take the initiative to accept the supervision of international law and sign a series of treaties, but the historical inertia makes the total prohibition of torture difficult. China's anti-torture road obstruction and long. Clear definition of torture is the beginning of anti-torture, but also determines the fate of anti-torture. We look forward to it.
【學位授予單位】：湘潭大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D924

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前7條

1 朱海波;;酷刑的界定——以國際刑法為視角[J];阿壩師范高等�？茖W校學報;2009年01期

2 劉昂;;酷刑性質(zhì)探析[J];當代法學;2007年05期

3 劉昂;薛振環(huán);;酷刑的界定[J];法學雜志;2009年02期

4 諸葛e

本文編號：1991500