本文關鍵詞： 偵查訊問 價值 完善 沉默權(quán) 監(jiān)督 檢察監(jiān)督 律師在場權(quán)　出處：《安徽大學》2003年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】： 刑事偵查訊問是獲取犯罪嫌疑人口供，查明案件事實的一種重要偵查手段。在我國現(xiàn)行的刑事訴訟中，還沒有哪一種證據(jù)象口供那樣使用廣泛，還沒有哪一種證據(jù)象口供那樣在偵查破案中發(fā)揮重要的作用。正因為口供的重要作用，在司法實踐中，辦案人員往往過分依賴口供，沒有口供不敢結(jié)案，以致于刑訊逼供等侵犯犯罪嫌疑人基本權(quán)利的現(xiàn)象屢禁不止。弱化口供的作用，保障犯罪嫌疑人口供的相對任意性，真正發(fā)揮刑事偵查訊問在偵查破案中的重要作用，需要改變傳統(tǒng)的訴訟理念和價值觀念，需要一套完整的偵查訊問模式和制度的改革。本文就如何完善我國現(xiàn)行的刑事偵查訊問進行初淺的探討，以期對改革完善我國現(xiàn)行的刑事偵查訊問制度有所幫助。全文共分四個部分。 第一部分闡明我國現(xiàn)行刑事偵查訊問制度的現(xiàn)狀以及存在的缺陷。1997年1月，經(jīng)全國人大八屆四次會議修正的刑事訴訟法正式生效。從該法規(guī)定的我國現(xiàn)行偵查訊問制度看，以犯罪嫌疑人的防御權(quán)為核心的人權(quán)保護呈現(xiàn)出一定的增強趨勢，基本上遵循了現(xiàn)代偵查訊問制度的一般規(guī)律。但由于在指導思想和價值的選擇上過分強調(diào)打擊犯罪和實體公正，對偵查訊問程序自身價值及犯罪嫌疑人權(quán)利保護關注不夠，導致現(xiàn)行的偵查訊問制度還存在不少缺陷：偵查機關與犯罪嫌疑人之間的權(quán)利配置嚴重失衡，偵查訊問完全是在秘密的狀態(tài)下進行，不受任何監(jiān)督；犯罪嫌疑人有如實回答偵查人員訊問的義務，但除了聘請律師提供提供幫助和代理申訴、控告以及對與案件無關問題的拒絕回答權(quán)外，幾乎無任何其他抗辯的權(quán)利，淪為查明案件事實的手段；法律雖然規(guī)定了禁止刑訊逼供等非法方法訊問犯罪嫌疑人，單并沒有規(guī)定非法獲取的口供以及以非法口供為線索獲得的其他證據(jù)的效力。上述缺陷導致在刑事訴訟中，偵查機關異乎尋常地重視口供，甚至不惜以非法手段獲取口供，犯罪嫌疑人的訴訟主體地位幾乎喪失殆盡，個人權(quán)利極易受到侵犯。 第二部分論述了刑事偵查訊問的價值及完善我國偵查訊問制度的價值選擇。如何選擇和設計一種案件事實能被準確發(fā)現(xiàn)和確定，又能公正地保障個人的基本權(quán)利，并且最大限度地實現(xiàn)訴訟效率的偵查訊問制度，在很大程度上是一個不同價值之間的綜合判斷和權(quán)衡問題。刑事偵查訊問作為刑事訴訟程序的一部分，也包含內(nèi)在價值、外在價值和效率價值，三種價值之間既對立又統(tǒng)一。對三種價值的不同選擇和取舍形成了兩種完全不同的偵查訊問模式和偵查訊問制度。以大陸法系國家為代表職權(quán)主義訊問模式及糾問式的訊問制度往往較能體現(xiàn)實體真實，但容易侵犯嫌疑人的權(quán)利。以英美法系國家為代表 的當事人主義訊問模式和彈劾式的訊問制度具有較為莢出的個人價 值，更能顯示程序的公正，但其代價是可能造成查明案件真實的能力 和訴訟效率的降低。從世界范圍的刑事訴訟發(fā)展歷史看，職權(quán)主義明 顯處于衰退趨勢，而當事人主義明顯處于上升趨勢。完善我國的刑事 偵查訊問制度必須堅持從國情出發(fā)，從價值觀上借鑒兩大法系的合理 因素，既重視實體真實和訴訟效率，又要注重訊問過程自身的價值。 特別是要惜鑒當事人主義的正當程序原則，突出偵查訊問過程的公正 性，以公正的程序獲取公正的事實，在程序公正和實體公正的基礎卜 推進訴訟效率的提高。 第三部分介紹了現(xiàn)代偵查訊問制度的主要內(nèi)容�，F(xiàn)代刑事偵育訊 問制度是以確保犯罪嫌疑人的訴訟主體地位和犯罪嫌疑人的陳述自 愿性為核心的，為確保犯罪嫌疑人陳述的自愿性并促使其作出理性的 選擇，世界各國及聯(lián)合國的相關法律都規(guī)定了一系列的保障制度－主 要包括賦予犯罪嫌疑人沉默權(quán)；訊問時要求律師在場的權(quán)利；對訊問 的方法、時間、地點、條件的限制等。 第四部分論述了完善我國偵育訊問制度的幾點思考。筆者認為， 完善我國現(xiàn)行的刑事偵查訊問制度必須充分考慮我國社會治安和刑 事司法的現(xiàn)狀，遵循刑事司法的國際標準，堅持最低限度的程序公上 標準。首先，應建立自白的任意性標準和非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則，建立有 限制的沉默權(quán)制度。我國建立該項制度是與國際接軌的需要，是抗辯 式訴訟機制的需要，，是無罪推定原則的必然延伸，是遏止刑訊逼供。 防止偵查人員濫用偵查權(quán)的有效手段。目前，我國已經(jīng)具備建立有限 制沉默權(quán)的政治、經(jīng)濟、和法制條件，應當從法律和技術角度對建） 有限制沉默權(quán)的內(nèi)容加以具體規(guī)定。其次應加強對偵查訊問活動的監(jiān) 督。偵查訊問中的違法行為很大程度上是因為缺少必要的監(jiān)督造成 的。為此本文建議從賦予辯護律師訊問在場權(quán)和加強檢察監(jiān)督兩個斤 面，強化對偵查訊問行為的監(jiān)督，明確加強這兩項監(jiān)督的重要性、必 要性，并對加強這兩項監(jiān)督的具體內(nèi)容明確加以規(guī)定。
[Abstract]:The criminal investigation and interrogation is to obtain the statement of suspect, an important means of investigation to verify the facts of cases. In the current criminal litigation in our country, there is no evidence that a confession as widely used, also did not play an important role as a kind of evidence which that confession in the detection. Because of the important role. In the judicial practice, investigators often rely on confessions, no confession not closed, that violated the inquisition by torture suspects the basic rights of the phenomenon of repeated. The weakening of the functions, guarantee the relative arbitrariness of criminal suspect's confession, really play an important role in criminal investigation and interrogation in investigation, need change the traditional litigation ideas and values, reform requires a complete set of interrogation mode and system. In this paper, how to improve our existing criminal interrogation. In order to improve the current system of criminal investigation and interrogation, the full text is divided into four parts, which is helpful to the reform and improvement of the current criminal investigation and interrogation system.
The first part of the status quo of China's current criminal investigation and interrogation system and defects existing in.1997 in January, the criminal procedure law of the four session of the eight National People's Congress revised the official force. From the current investigation and interrogation system in our country the law, protection of human rights to the criminal suspect defense power as the core has an increasing trend the general rule basically follows the modern interrogation system. But because of the guiding ideology and value too much emphasis on the choice of the fight against crime and the entity justice, procedure of investigation and interrogation of the value and protection of the rights of criminal suspects in investigation and interrogation system not enough attention, there are still many defects: the serious imbalance between the investigation organ and the rights of criminal suspects configuration, interrogation is completely in a state secret, without any supervision; criminal suspect investigation answer truthfully Check the personnel interrogation obligations, but in addition to hire a lawyer to provide help and appeals, and the accused in the case rejected the unrelated question answered right, almost no other right to defense, a means of identifying the facts of the case; although the legal provisions of the prohibition of torture and other illegal methods of interrogation of criminal suspects, and no single the provisions of illegal access to confession and the effect to the illegal confession other evidence obtained. These defects result in criminal proceedings, the investigation organ to unusual affidavit, even illegal means to obtain confessions of criminal suspects, the subject of litigation is almost lost, personal rights are extremely easy to be infringed.
The second part discusses the value of investigative interrogation and perfect the system of interrogation in China. How to choose the value choice and design of a case can be found and identified, and do justice to protect the basic rights of individuals, the system of investigative interrogation and maximize the efficiency of litigation, is to a large extent the different value between the comprehensive judgment and weighing. Criminal interrogation as a part of criminal procedure, but also contains the intrinsic value, external value and efficiency value between the three values and the unity of opposites. Different choice of three kinds of value formed two completely different mode and system of Investigative Interrogation in civil law countries as the representative of authority and ask the correct interrogation system is to reflect the reality of interrogation mode, but it is easy to infringe the rights of suspects in Britain. Representative of the countries of the United States law system
The litigant interrogation model and the impeachment type interrogation system have a relatively pod individual price
Value, more can show the justice of the program, but the price can cause the ability to find out the truth of the case
And the reduction of the efficiency of the lawsuit. From the history of the development of the criminal procedure in the world
There is a trend of decline, and the trend of the litigant is obviously on the rise.
The investigation and interrogation system must adhere to the national conditions and draw on the rationality of the two legal systems from the values.
Factors, not only pay attention to entity truth and litigation efficiency, but also pay attention to the value of the process of interrogation.
In particular, we should cherish the due process principle of the litigant, and highlight the justice of the investigation and interrogation process.
Sex, a fair procedure for obtaining a fair fact, on the basis of procedural justice and substantive justice
Promote the efficiency of litigation.
Part three introduces the main contents of the modern investigation and interrogation system.
The system is to ensure the status of the subject of the criminal suspect and the statement of the suspect.
The desire for the core is to ensure the voluntary statement of the criminal suspect and make it rational.
The relevant laws of the world and the United Nations have set up a series of safeguards.
To include the right to silence the suspect; the right to ask the lawyer to be present at the time of interrogation; to interrogate
The method, time, place, restriction of conditions, etc.
In the fourth part, some thoughts on improving the interrogation system in China are discussed.
To perfect the current criminal investigation and interrogation system in our country, we must fully consider the social security and punishment of our country
The present situation of judicature, following the international standard of criminal justice, insisting on the minimum procedure public
First, we should establish an arbitrary standard of confession and the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence.
The system of restricting the right to silence. The establishment of this system in China is the need to meet the international standards and is a defense.
The need for the mechanism of litigation is the inevitable extension of the principle of presumption of innocence and the suppression of extorting the confession by torture.
The effective means to prevent the investigator from abusing the power of investigation. At present, China has established a limited establishment.
The political, economic, and legal conditions of making the right to silence should be built from the perspective of law and technology.
The contents of the right to restrict silence should be specified. Secondly, the supervision of investigation and interrogation should be strengthened.
The offense in the interrogation is largely due to the lack of necessary supervision.
For this reason, this article suggests two catties from giving counsel to the defence counsel to interrogate the right to present and to strengthen procuratorial supervision
To strengthen the supervision of the investigation and interrogation, and to strengthen the importance of these two supervision clearly.
It is necessary to make clear the specific contents of the two supervision.

【學位授予單位】：安徽大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2003
【分類號】：D918.5

【引證文獻】

相關碩士學位論文 前3條

1 叢東;刑事偵查訊問制度的程序性法律規(guī)制[D];華東政法大學;2010年

2 劉春鵬;偵查訊問制度研究[D];復旦大學;2010年

3 騰海勇;河南省公安機關刑事偵查運用思想政治教育問題研究[D];河南工業(yè)大學;2012年

本文編號：1461028