職務(wù)犯罪偵查模式論
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-08-16 10:56
【摘要】：在職務(wù)犯罪偵查中，檢察機(jī)關(guān)與犯罪嫌疑人是相互獨(dú)立也是相互對立的訴訟主體。所謂職務(wù)犯罪偵查模式，即是檢察機(jī)關(guān)在啟動偵查程序之后，與犯罪嫌疑人各自展開訴訟活動所依據(jù)的程序制度的總和。從訴訟結(jié)構(gòu)的角度來考察，職務(wù)犯罪偵查模式主要包括四個基本要素：職務(wù)犯罪偵查中的訴訟主體，即檢察機(jī)關(guān)與犯罪嫌疑人這一對訴訟主體；職務(wù)犯罪偵查中的訴訟權(quán)能，即檢察機(jī)關(guān)的訴訟權(quán)力與犯罪嫌疑人的訴訟權(quán)利；職務(wù)犯罪偵查中的訴訟規(guī)則，即檢察機(jī)關(guān)與犯罪嫌疑人在職務(wù)犯罪偵查程序中應(yīng)當(dāng)遵守的程序法規(guī)則，以規(guī)范檢察機(jī)關(guān)與犯罪嫌疑人在利益沖突中形成的權(quán)能對峙，加強(qiáng)對犯罪嫌疑人正當(dāng)權(quán)益的保障；職務(wù)犯罪偵查中的內(nèi)外制衡，主要指通過加強(qiáng)內(nèi)部的制約和外部的監(jiān)督來規(guī)范偵查權(quán)力的行使，促進(jìn)司法的公正�？疾煳覈鴼v史上歷朝對官吏糾察問罪的規(guī)定，在“重典懲貪”思想的指導(dǎo)下，特別重視糾察機(jī)構(gòu)的糾問職權(quán)，僅把被糾察官吏作為糾問的對象，糾察活動帶有強(qiáng)烈的專制色彩。我國現(xiàn)行刑事訴訟法雖然賦予犯罪嫌疑人訴訟主體的地位，但與檢察機(jī)關(guān)在偵查程序中的權(quán)力相比，毫無疑問處于絕對劣勢。在職務(wù)犯罪偵查中，以強(qiáng)大的國家強(qiáng)制力為后盾所行使的偵查權(quán)力，帶有明顯的糾問主義色彩，這也與我國訴訟體制的基本建構(gòu)屬于大陸法系類型有關(guān)。大體來講，現(xiàn)代的偵查模式類型可以分為職權(quán)主義偵查模式和彈劾主義偵查模式。大陸法系國家在刑事訴訟領(lǐng)域秉持犯罪控制觀，其所采取的偵查模式可以歸屬為職權(quán)式，英美法系國家秉持權(quán)利保障觀，其所采取的偵查模式可以歸屬為彈劾式。職權(quán)主義偵查模式與彈劾主義偵查模式各有特色。在職權(quán)主義偵查模式中，偵查機(jī)關(guān)處于比較強(qiáng)勢的地位，且偵查與起訴工作的銜接非常緊密，所以更有利于打擊和控制犯罪；在彈劾主義偵查模式中，偵查機(jī)關(guān)與嫌疑人處于對等的地位，且對偵查權(quán)力的限制比較嚴(yán)格，所以更有利于維護(hù)嫌疑人的權(quán)益。我國現(xiàn)在的職務(wù)犯罪偵查模式屬于職權(quán)主義類型的偵查模式。由于我國目前處于職務(wù)犯罪的多發(fā)和高發(fā)期，所以堅(jiān)決打擊和遏制職務(wù)犯罪仍將是我們必須堅(jiān)持的應(yīng)對方針，但同時(shí)也應(yīng)適當(dāng)吸收彈劾主義偵查模式中的一些合理之處，，盡量在有效控制犯罪與有效保障權(quán)利之間實(shí)現(xiàn)基本的平衡。 偵查程序的開啟，是對案件事實(shí)調(diào)查的開始，偵查程序的終結(jié)，是對案件事實(shí)調(diào)查的完結(jié)。在偵查程序中，有什么樣的案件真實(shí)觀，就有什么樣的偵查模式。在我國職務(wù)犯罪偵查程序中，應(yīng)當(dāng)樹立辨證的真實(shí)觀。因?yàn)槁殑?wù)犯罪偵查活動的首要問題是發(fā)現(xiàn)案件事實(shí)的客觀真實(shí)，亦即應(yīng)努力還原案件的原貌，這是檢察機(jī)關(guān)開展偵查活動的當(dāng)然任
[Abstract]:In the investigation of duty crime, the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect are independent and opposite subject of litigation. The so-called duty crime investigation mode is the summation of the procedural system on which the procuratorial organ starts the investigation procedure and carries out the lawsuit activities with the criminal suspect respectively. From the point of view of litigation structure, the investigation mode of duty crime mainly includes four basic elements: the main body of litigation in the investigation of duty crime, that is, the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect as a pair of litigant subjects, the power of action in the investigation of duty crime, That is, the procedural power of the procuratorial organ and the lawsuit right of the criminal suspect, the procedural rules in the investigation of the duty crime, that is, the procedural law rules that the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect should abide by in the procedure of the investigation of the duty crime, In order to standardize the power confrontation between the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect in the conflict of interest, to strengthen the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the criminal suspect; the internal and external checks and balances in the investigation of duty crime, It mainly refers to standardizing the exercise of investigative power and promoting judicial justice by strengthening internal restriction and external supervision. Under the guidance of the thought of "severe punishment and corruption", we pay special attention to the power of correction of the correctional institutions, and only take the officials under correction as the object of inquiry, and the activities of correction have a strong autocratic tinge. Although the current criminal procedure law of our country gives the criminal suspect the status of the main body of the lawsuit, but compared with the power of the procuratorial organ in the investigation procedure, it is undoubtedly at an absolute disadvantage. In the investigation of job-related crimes, the investigative power exercised on the basis of the powerful national coercive force has a distinct interrogationist color, which is also related to the basic construction of the litigation system of our country belonging to the type of continental legal system. Generally speaking, the modern investigation mode can be divided into authority investigation mode and impeachment investigation mode. Civil law countries uphold the concept of crime control in the field of criminal procedure, and the investigation mode adopted by them can be attributed to the style of power, and the mode of investigation adopted by countries of common law system can be attributed to impeachment. The investigative mode of power doctrine and impeachment principle have their own characteristics. In the investigation mode of power doctrine, the investigative organ is in a relatively strong position, and the work of investigation and prosecution is closely linked, so it is more conducive to the fight against and control of crime; in the mode of impeachment investigation, Investigation organ and suspect are in equal position, and the power of investigation is restricted strictly, so it is more advantageous to safeguard the rights and interests of suspect. The investigation mode of duty crime in our country now belongs to the investigation mode of power doctrine. As our country is currently in the period of frequent and high incidence of job-related crimes, resolutely cracking down on and containing job-related crimes will still be the policy we must adhere to, but at the same time, we should also appropriately absorb some reasonable points in the impeachment investigation model. Try to achieve a basic balance between effective crime control and effective protection of rights. The opening of investigation procedure is the beginning of case fact investigation, the end of investigation procedure and the conclusion of case fact investigation. In the investigation procedure, what kind of case truthfulness view, has what kind of investigation pattern. In our country duty crime investigation procedure, should establish the dialectical truth view. Because the primary problem in the investigation of job-related crimes is to find the objective truth of the facts of the case, that is to say, we should try to restore the original appearance of the case, which is the natural duty of the procuratorial organs to carry out the investigation activities.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2006
【分類號】：D918;D925.2
本文編號：2185779
[Abstract]:In the investigation of duty crime, the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect are independent and opposite subject of litigation. The so-called duty crime investigation mode is the summation of the procedural system on which the procuratorial organ starts the investigation procedure and carries out the lawsuit activities with the criminal suspect respectively. From the point of view of litigation structure, the investigation mode of duty crime mainly includes four basic elements: the main body of litigation in the investigation of duty crime, that is, the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect as a pair of litigant subjects, the power of action in the investigation of duty crime, That is, the procedural power of the procuratorial organ and the lawsuit right of the criminal suspect, the procedural rules in the investigation of the duty crime, that is, the procedural law rules that the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect should abide by in the procedure of the investigation of the duty crime, In order to standardize the power confrontation between the procuratorial organ and the criminal suspect in the conflict of interest, to strengthen the protection of the legitimate rights and interests of the criminal suspect; the internal and external checks and balances in the investigation of duty crime, It mainly refers to standardizing the exercise of investigative power and promoting judicial justice by strengthening internal restriction and external supervision. Under the guidance of the thought of "severe punishment and corruption", we pay special attention to the power of correction of the correctional institutions, and only take the officials under correction as the object of inquiry, and the activities of correction have a strong autocratic tinge. Although the current criminal procedure law of our country gives the criminal suspect the status of the main body of the lawsuit, but compared with the power of the procuratorial organ in the investigation procedure, it is undoubtedly at an absolute disadvantage. In the investigation of job-related crimes, the investigative power exercised on the basis of the powerful national coercive force has a distinct interrogationist color, which is also related to the basic construction of the litigation system of our country belonging to the type of continental legal system. Generally speaking, the modern investigation mode can be divided into authority investigation mode and impeachment investigation mode. Civil law countries uphold the concept of crime control in the field of criminal procedure, and the investigation mode adopted by them can be attributed to the style of power, and the mode of investigation adopted by countries of common law system can be attributed to impeachment. The investigative mode of power doctrine and impeachment principle have their own characteristics. In the investigation mode of power doctrine, the investigative organ is in a relatively strong position, and the work of investigation and prosecution is closely linked, so it is more conducive to the fight against and control of crime; in the mode of impeachment investigation, Investigation organ and suspect are in equal position, and the power of investigation is restricted strictly, so it is more advantageous to safeguard the rights and interests of suspect. The investigation mode of duty crime in our country now belongs to the investigation mode of power doctrine. As our country is currently in the period of frequent and high incidence of job-related crimes, resolutely cracking down on and containing job-related crimes will still be the policy we must adhere to, but at the same time, we should also appropriately absorb some reasonable points in the impeachment investigation model. Try to achieve a basic balance between effective crime control and effective protection of rights. The opening of investigation procedure is the beginning of case fact investigation, the end of investigation procedure and the conclusion of case fact investigation. In the investigation procedure, what kind of case truthfulness view, has what kind of investigation pattern. In our country duty crime investigation procedure, should establish the dialectical truth view. Because the primary problem in the investigation of job-related crimes is to find the objective truth of the facts of the case, that is to say, we should try to restore the original appearance of the case, which is the natural duty of the procuratorial organs to carry out the investigation activities.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：西南政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2006
【分類號】：D918;D925.2
【引證文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條
1 吳利娜;;從律師法的修改看我國職務(wù)犯罪偵查模式的變遷[J];法制與社會;2008年26期
相關(guān)會議論文 前1條
1 于喜峰;劉志惠;;偵查程序修改與職務(wù)犯罪偵查辦案模式校正[A];第八屆國家高級檢察官論壇論文集：偵查程序的修改與檢察工作應(yīng)對[C];2012年
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條
1 任學(xué)強(qiáng);腐敗犯罪特殊訴訟程序研究[D];上海交通大學(xué);2010年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條
1 邢芳;香港反貪偵查模式研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2011年
2 于欣;法律監(jiān)督視角下的職務(wù)犯罪偵查問題研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2011年
3 杜志輝;利用影響力受賄犯罪的偵查取證問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2011年
4 王珂;職務(wù)犯罪偵查一體化機(jī)制運(yùn)行與完善[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2010年
5 管文;職務(wù)犯罪初查問題研究[D];西南政法大學(xué);2011年
6 王國鋒;職務(wù)犯罪偵查權(quán)的監(jiān)督與制約機(jī)制研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2008年
7 張自超;我國職務(wù)犯罪初查制度研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2009年
8 周曉東;論我國反腐敗機(jī)構(gòu)的完善[D];蘇州大學(xué);2009年
9 文藝蘭;中韓兩國檢警關(guān)系比較[D];延邊大學(xué);2010年
10 田稼馨;論反腐敗案件中對犯罪嫌疑人的權(quán)利保障[D];中國政法大學(xué);2010年
本文編號：2185779
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/shekelunwen/gongan/2185779.html
教材專著
