【摘要】：進(jìn)入21世紀(jì)以來,世界各國都面臨著日益嚴(yán)峻的犯罪形勢。不僅犯罪數(shù)量逐年遞增,犯罪行為也越發(fā)呈現(xiàn)出組織化、智能化、隱蔽化的趨勢。新型犯罪不斷涌現(xiàn),嚴(yán)重犯罪時有發(fā)生。對于新型犯罪以及部分嚴(yán)重犯罪,傳統(tǒng)的偵查手段已經(jīng)無法發(fā)揮原有的作用,刑事偵查活動面臨嚴(yán)重困境。為了擺脫這一窘境,世界各國都不約而同地將希望寄托在了監(jiān)聽等特殊偵查手段上。監(jiān)聽是一種兼具秘密性與技術(shù)性的特殊偵查手段,與傳統(tǒng)偵查手段相比,監(jiān)聽具有隱蔽和高效的優(yōu)勢,在刑事偵查過程中加以利用可以比較容易地獲取相關(guān)證據(jù)。正因如此,各國偵查機(jī)關(guān)無不將監(jiān)聽奉為控制犯罪的“殺手锏”。然而,作為一種強制偵查措施,監(jiān)聽在發(fā)揮積極作用的同時,不可避免地將侵犯公民基本權(quán)利。美國、德國、日本等法治國家都依據(jù)一定的法律原則之要求對監(jiān)聽進(jìn)行嚴(yán)格的法律規(guī)制,通過監(jiān)聽權(quán)的授予與限制,力求在犯罪打擊和保障人權(quán)之間尋找平衡。在我國,監(jiān)聽措施屬于國家秘密,不便在法律單獨明確規(guī)定,立法者只得以“技術(shù)偵查”的名義對監(jiān)聽同其他技術(shù)偵查手段統(tǒng)一進(jìn)行立法。長期以來,我國技術(shù)偵查法律制度主要由偵查機(jī)關(guān)對外嚴(yán)格保密的內(nèi)部規(guī)定構(gòu)成。直到2012年《刑事訴訟法》及相關(guān)司法解釋的出臺后,我國才形成了公開的技術(shù)偵查法律制度。然而相關(guān)法律規(guī)定仍然存在諸多缺陷,偏重于廣泛授權(quán),對于監(jiān)聽等技術(shù)偵查手段的限制不力。這也導(dǎo)致我國司法實踐中濫用監(jiān)聽的現(xiàn)象時有發(fā)生,并漸成趨勢。因此參照其它法治國家的監(jiān)聽立法經(jīng)驗,遵循法律保留原則、法官保留原則、比例原則和權(quán)利救濟(jì)原則的要求,對我國監(jiān)聽立法進(jìn)行修正和完善已迫在眉睫。
[Abstract]:Since the beginning of the 21 st century, all countries in the world are facing an increasingly serious crime situation. Not only the number of crimes is increasing year by year, but also the trend of organization, intelligence and concealment is becoming more and more obvious. New types of crime continue to emerge, and serious crimes occur from time to time. For the new crime and some serious crimes, the traditional investigation methods have been unable to play their original role, and the criminal investigation activities are facing serious difficulties. In order to get rid of this dilemma, all countries in the world place their hopes on special investigation techniques such as surveillance. Surveillance is a kind of special investigation means which has both confidentiality and technology. compared with the traditional investigation means, surveillance has the advantages of concealment and efficiency. It is easier to obtain relevant evidence by using it in the process of criminal investigation. Because of this, the investigation organs of all countries regard surveillance as the "killer mace" to control crime. However, as a compulsory investigation measure, surveillance will inevitably infringe on the basic rights of citizens while playing an active role. The United States, Germany, Japan and other countries ruled by law all strictly regulate surveillance according to certain legal principles, and strive to find a balance between crime cracking and human rights protection through the granting and restriction of the right to listen. In our country, the surveillance measure belongs to the state secret, which is inconvenient to specify separately in the law, so the legislator has to make legislation on the surveillance and other technical investigation means in the name of "technical investigation". For a long time, the legal system of technical investigation in our country is mainly composed of the internal provisions of strict confidentiality of the investigation organs. It was not until the introduction of Criminal procedure Law and related judicial interpretation in 2012 that China formed an open legal system of technical investigation. However, there are still many defects in the relevant legal provisions, focusing on extensive authorization, weak restrictions on technical investigation techniques such as surveillance. This also leads to the abuse of surveillance in judicial practice in our country from time to time, and gradually become a trend. Therefore, referring to the experience of surveillance legislation in other countries ruled by law, following the principle of legal reservation, the principle of judge reservation, the principle of proportion and the principle of right relief, it is urgent to amend and perfect the monitoring legislation of our country.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國青年政治學(xué)院
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.2

【共引文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 鞏寒冰;蔡鑫;;刑事錯案預(yù)防與偵查能力的提升[J];福建警察學(xué)院學(xué)報;2012年01期

2 李莎;;邊防部門辦理刑事案件中特殊偵查行為適用的探析[J];法學(xué)與實踐;2010年03期

3 向芙蓉;;論職務(wù)犯罪偵查權(quán)的科學(xué)配置[J];法制與社會;2008年26期

4 秦小兵;;淺談人性化執(zhí)法在查辦貪污賄賂犯罪中的實踐和適用——以科學(xué)發(fā)展觀為背景[J];法制與社會;2008年35期

5 劉夢妮;;淺談瀆職犯罪偵查訊問技巧[J];法制與社會;2010年31期

6 張鋼;;軍地刑事司法視角下“偵查”和“偵察”界分[J];法制與社會;2012年08期

7 云山城;;我國《刑事訴訟法》再修改中的偵查措施立法研究[J];中國人民公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2007年04期

8 董邦俊;;危害環(huán)境資源犯罪案件偵查研究[J];中國人民公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2011年03期

9 李波陽;李棟;;“刑事案件偵查”實踐教學(xué)模式思考[J];公安教育;2011年09期

10 董坤;劉碩;;論特色化的偵查學(xué)課程體系模塊之建構(gòu)[J];公安學(xué)刊(浙江警察學(xué)院學(xué)報);2008年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 蔣開富;偵查策略正當(dāng)性原理[D];西南政法大學(xué);2006年

2 馮景旭;口供論[D];中國政法大學(xué);2007年

3 何挺;“嚴(yán)打”刑事政策研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2008年

4 黃道誠;宋代偵查制度與技術(shù)研究[D];河北大學(xué);2009年

5 趙天睿;法庭論證的幾個理論問題透析[D];中國政法大學(xué);2011年

6 王天民;實質(zhì)真實論[D];西南政法大學(xué);2010年

7 楊明芳;英國刑法一般辯護(hù)事由研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

8 吳憲國;檢察機(jī)關(guān)排除非法證據(jù)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

9 王鑫磊;幫助犯研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

10 陳燁;刑法的特殊財產(chǎn)類型研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號：2504504