本文選題：刑事 + 訴訟中��； 參考：《中國(guó)政法大學(xué)》2004年碩士論文

【摘要】： 嚴(yán)禁在司法活動(dòng)中刑訊逼供，這在刑事訴訟法中早已有了明確規(guī)定。然而，長(zhǎng)期以來，刑訊逼供現(xiàn)象卻一直困擾著刑事司法工作。這與我國(guó)社會(huì)主義民主法制日趨完善的形勢(shì)是極不相稱的，不僅侵犯了公民的人身權(quán)益，而且嚴(yán)重?fù)p害了公安機(jī)關(guān)的威信、形象和聲譽(yù)。因此，加大對(duì)刑訊逼供犯罪案件的打擊力度，有效遏止刑訊逼供現(xiàn)象刻不容緩。 刑訊逼供的目的是什么？是為了獲取口供。司法人員在辦案中偏愛口供，這是一個(gè)不爭(zhēng)的事實(shí)。雖然我國(guó)的法律明確規(guī)定不得輕信口供，還規(guī)定審判不要求必須有被告人的供述，但是在實(shí)踐中，偵查人員沒有口供不結(jié)案，檢察人員沒有口供不起訴，審判人員沒有口供不判案的情況屢見不鮮。司法人員對(duì)口供的偏愛有深遠(yuǎn)的歷史淵源。當(dāng)人類所掌握的司法證明手段還不夠發(fā)達(dá)的時(shí)候，辦案人員自然認(rèn)為犯罪人或被告人的口供最有證明價(jià)值。世界上很多國(guó)家都曾經(jīng)把被告人的口供作為定案的必要證據(jù)。例如，中世紀(jì)歐洲國(guó)家的法律就明文規(guī)定被告人口供是“最完整的證據(jù)”，是“證據(jù)之王”。中國(guó)古代也有“斷罪必取輸服供詞”和“無(wú)供不錄案”等訴訟原則。但是，以口供為“證據(jù)之王”的訴訟制度必然導(dǎo)致刑訊逼供的泛濫。且不說貪官污吏常假借刑訊來草菅人命，就連包公等“青天大老爺”也把刑訊視為“看家手段”，動(dòng)不動(dòng)就“大刑伺候”，聲稱“不用大刑，焉得實(shí)供”。 刑訊逼供很容易造成冤假錯(cuò)案，這是無(wú)庸贅述的。早在17世紀(jì)的法國(guó)，有人就曾經(jīng)深刻地指出：刑訊是一種絕好的發(fā)明。它一方面可以使一個(gè)意志薄弱的無(wú)辜者被判有罪，另一方面也可以使一個(gè)意志堅(jiān)強(qiáng)的有罪者被判無(wú)罪。本文的寫作目的就是試圖通過對(duì)刑訊逼供現(xiàn)象的表現(xiàn)形式、產(chǎn)生原因以及危害的全面分析，得出遏制刑訊逼供的對(duì)策。 全文共分四個(gè)部分： 第一部分導(dǎo)論闡述了刑訊逼供的概念。 第二部分刑訊逼供的表現(xiàn)形式及危害。從刑訊逼供的三種表現(xiàn)形式以及五方面危害來描述刑訊逼供現(xiàn)象的外部特征，使讀者對(duì)刑訊逼供現(xiàn)象有一初步認(rèn)識(shí)。 第三部分論述的是產(chǎn)生刑訊逼供的原因。刑訊逼供的原因很多，有歷史原因、認(rèn)識(shí)原因、立法原因、心理原因，但是筆者認(rèn)為司法實(shí)踐中長(zhǎng)期以來“由供到證”的辦案模式，，對(duì)口供的過分依賴是刑訊逼供屢禁不止的重要原因之一。 第四部分遏止刑訊逼供的對(duì)策。旨在探討如何避免刑訊逼供的發(fā)生。要改變刑訊逼供泛濫這種現(xiàn)狀，筆者認(rèn)為應(yīng)通過以下途徑來解決：首先應(yīng)加強(qiáng)對(duì)偵查人員的培養(yǎng)和教育，提高其綜合素質(zhì)改變有罪推定的思維定勢(shì)，確立無(wú)罪推定觀念。其次，強(qiáng)化犯罪 WP=5 嫌疑人的訴訟主體地位，確立相關(guān)制度，例如明確無(wú)罪推定原則、確立非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則、強(qiáng)化律師介入訴訟等。另外，關(guān)鍵的一點(diǎn)是加大刑事訴訟的司法投入，提高司法機(jī)關(guān)技術(shù)裝備水平和辦案手段中的科技含量，以提高同犯罪做斗爭(zhēng)的能力，從而改變圍繞犯罪嫌疑人口供找證據(jù)，為獲取口供而使用刑訊逼供的惡性循環(huán)狀態(tài)。最后是建立健全監(jiān)督機(jī)制，加大對(duì)刑訊逼供的查處力度。 筆者希望通過對(duì)上述對(duì)策的采取，將有效遏制刑訊逼供現(xiàn)象的發(fā)生，使犯罪嫌疑人、被告人乃至無(wú)辜百姓的人身權(quán)利和民主權(quán)利得到切實(shí)保障。?
[Abstract]:It is forbidden to extort a confession by torture in judicial activities, which has long been clearly stipulated in the criminal procedure law. However, for a long time, the phenomenon of extorting the confession by torture has been perplexing the criminal judicial work. This is extremely disproportionate to the increasingly perfect situation of our socialist democratic legal system, which not only invades the personal rights and interests of the citizens, but also seriously damages the public. The prestige, image and reputation of the security organs are increasing. Therefore, it is imperative to intensify the crackdown on torture cases and effectively curb torture.
What is the purpose of extorting a confession by torture? It is for the purpose of obtaining a confession. It is an indisputable fact that the judiciary favors the confession in handling the case. Although the law of our country clearly stipulates that the confession cannot be creduled, the trial does not require the confession of the accused, but in practice, the investigators have no confession and no oral confession, and the prosecutors have no confession. Without prosecution, it is common for judges to have no oral confession or not to judge cases. There is a profound historical origin for the preference of the judiciary. When the judicial testimony of human beings is not developed enough, the case handlers naturally think that the confession of the offender or the accused is the most valuable. For example, the law of the European countries in the Middle Ages stipulates that the supply of the accused is "the most complete evidence", the "king of evidence". In ancient China, there were also the principles of litigation, such as "the confession of the crime must be taken" and "the case of no confession". However, the litigation system of "king of evidence" with the oral confession is necessary. But it is not to say that the corrupt officials often borrow the torture to kill the human life, and even Bao Gong, such as "the old lord of the blue sky", also regarded torture as a "means of seeing a family", and was not moved to "big punishment".
The extortion of confession by torture is easy to cause false and false cases. In France, in seventeenth Century, it was pointed out that torture was an excellent invention. On the one hand, it could make an innocent person with a weak will be convicted. On the other hand, a guilty person with a strong sense of crime could be found innocent. It is through the comprehensive analysis of the manifestations, causes and harm of extorting confessions by torture, and the countermeasures to curb extorting confessions by torture.
The full text is divided into four parts:
The first part is an introduction to the concept of extorting confession by torture.
The second part of the expression and harm of extorting confession by torture. From the three forms of expression of extorting confession by torture and the harm of five aspects to describe the external characteristics of the phenomenon of extorting confession by torture, so that readers have a preliminary understanding of the phenomenon of extorting confession by torture.
The third part discusses the reasons for the extortion of confessions by torture. There are many reasons for the extortion of confessions by torture, such as historical reasons, understanding reasons, legislative reasons and psychological reasons, but the author thinks that the "from the supply to evidence" mode of handling cases in judicial practice for a long time, and the excessive dependence on the confession are one of the important reasons for the repeated prohibition of torture.
The fourth part is to prevent the extortion of confession by torture. The purpose of this study is to avoid the occurrence of extorting confession by torture. To change the current situation of extorting the confession by torture, the author thinks that the following ways should be taken to solve the problem: first, we should strengthen the training and education of the investigators, improve their comprehensive quality and change the presumption of guilt, and establish the concept of presumption of innocence. Secondly, strengthening crime
WP=5
The main position of the suspect's litigation is to establish the relevant system, such as the principle of presumption of innocence, the establishment of the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence, and the strengthening of the lawyer's intervention in litigation. In addition, the key point is to increase the judicial input in the criminal procedure, to improve the level of the technical equipment and to improve the scientific and technological content in the means of the case, so as to improve the struggle against the crime. Ability to change the vicious circle around the suspect to find evidence for the confession by torture, and finally to establish and improve the supervision mechanism, and to increase the investigation and punishment of extorting confession by torture.
The author hopes that through the adoption of the above-mentioned countermeasures, the phenomenon of extorting the confession by torture will be effectively contained, so that the personal rights and democratic rights of the suspects, the accused and even the innocent people will be guaranteed.

【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】：2004
【分類號(hào)】：D917

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 伍光紅;;偵查階段的刑訊逼供及其控制——以結(jié)構(gòu)主義為視角[J];江西社會(huì)科學(xué);2006年04期

2 劉杰輝;試論刑訊逼供的危害及對(duì)策[J];遼寧警專學(xué)報(bào);2002年02期

3 王春;;中國(guó)對(duì)刑訊逼供說“不”[J];廉政w

本文編號(hào)：1816662