本文選題：審判中心主義　切入點：庭審實質(zhì)化　出處：《北方工業(yè)大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：刑事辯護制度是刑事訴訟制度的重要組成部分,作為司法制度的重要內(nèi)容之一,刑事辯護貫穿刑事訴訟程序的始終,無論是偵查階段、審查起訴階段還是審判階段,保障辯護權(quán)成為刑事司法關(guān)注和不斷完善的內(nèi)容要求�；仡櫼酝�,諸多被標注為冤假錯案的判決幾乎皆與陳舊的"偵查中心主義"刑事訴訟制度有關(guān),在這種訴訟模式下,查獲犯罪和追究犯罪嫌疑人的刑事責任成為刑事訴訟程序的重點,控辯雙方難以平等對抗、非法證據(jù)難以有效排除,以及庭審形式化等突出問題,導致犯罪嫌疑人、被告人和辯護律師的辯護權(quán)利難以有效保障。伴隨依法治國理念的深化和貫徹落實,"推進以審判為中心的訴訟制度改革"成為司法改革的重點,"審判中心主義"轉(zhuǎn)變了"偵查中心主義"刑事訴訟制度的重心,要求偵查、審查起訴圍繞著審判工作進行。制約偵檢機關(guān)的偵查、追訴權(quán),落實直接言辭原則,貫徹證據(jù)裁判規(guī)則、控辯平等原則,以及推進庭審實質(zhì)化等內(nèi)容要求成為審判中心主義的實質(zhì)內(nèi)涵。然而,制度理念的要求與司法實踐的現(xiàn)狀必然不能完全契合。司法實踐中公、檢、法三機關(guān)配合過度導致控辯失衡的情況屢見不鮮;審判階段默許證人、鑒定人缺席庭審成為司法習慣,致使直接言詞原則成為空談;辯護律師申請權(quán)由于沒有賦予保障救濟措施而形同虛設;卷宗移送制度、庭審質(zhì)證程序以及庭后裁判程序等依舊流于形式。立足司法現(xiàn)狀,落實直接言詞原則,嚴格實行非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則,建立采取、變更、解除強制措施的聽證程序和第三方審查機制,完善侵犯辯護人權(quán)利的程序性制裁機制,是進一步完善刑事辯護保障機制、推進以審判為中心的訴訟制度的有效措施。
[Abstract]:The criminal defense system is an important part of the criminal procedure system. As one of the important contents of the judicial system, the criminal defense runs through the criminal procedure from beginning to end, whether it is the investigation stage, the examination and prosecution stage or the trial stage. The protection of the right to defense has become a matter of concern and continuous improvement in criminal justice. Looking back on the past, many judgments marked as unjust, false and wrong cases are almost related to the old "investigative centrism" criminal litigation system. In this kind of litigation mode, Finding out the crime and investigating the criminal responsibility of the criminal suspect become the focus of the criminal procedure, the prosecution and the defense are difficult to confront equally, the illegal evidence is difficult to be effectively excluded, and the trial is formalized, leading to the criminal suspect. The defense rights of defendants and defence lawyers cannot be effectively guaranteed. With the deepening and implementation of the concept of governing the country according to law, "promoting the reform of the litigation system centered on trial" has become the focus of judicial reform and "adjudication-centrism". Has changed the center of gravity of the criminal procedure system of "investigative centrism", Requiring investigation and examination and prosecution to be carried out around the trial work, restricting the investigation and prosecution authority of the investigative and procuratorial organs, implementing the principle of direct speech, implementing the rules of evidence adjudication, and the principle of equality between prosecution and defense, However, the requirements of the system concept and the present situation of judicial practice must not be completely consistent with the content of the essence of trial, such as promoting the materialization of the trial, and so on, in the judicial practice, the judicial practice, the judicial practice, the judicial practice, the judicial practice, the judicial practice, It is common for the law three organs to cooperate excessively to lead to the imbalance of the prosecution and defense; the acquiescence of witnesses and the absence of experts in the trial stage becomes the judicial custom, and the principle of direct words becomes empty talk; The right to apply for defense counsel has no guarantee and relief measures, and the system of transfer of files, the procedure of cross-examination in court and the procedure of decision after court are still mere formality, and the principle of direct speech is implemented based on the current situation of the judicature and the implementation of the principle of direct speech. Strictly implementing the rule of excluding illegal evidence, establishing the hearing procedure for adopting, changing and lifting coercive measures and the third party examination mechanism, and perfecting the procedural sanction mechanism for violating the rights of defenders are to further improve the criminal defense safeguard mechanism. Effective measures to promote the trial-centered litigation system.
【學位授予單位】：北方工業(yè)大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.2

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 衛(wèi)躍寧;宋振策;;論庭審實質(zhì)化[J];國家檢察官學院學報;2015年06期

2 卞建林;倪潤;;證據(jù)裁判原則在我國的確立與貫徹[J];貴州民族大學學報(哲學社會科學版);2015年04期

3 戴萍;陳鵬飛;;以審判為中心的訴訟制度改革對檢察機關(guān)的影響及應對[J];廣東行政學院學報;2015年04期

4 田文昌;;審判中心主義的理念和制度實施[J];中國改革;2015年08期

5 魏曉娜;;以審判為中心的刑事訴訟制度改革[J];法學研究;2015年04期

6 樊崇義;李思遠;;以審判為中心訴訟制度下鑒定人出庭制度研究[J];中國司法鑒定;2015年04期

7 葉竹盛;;法官與律師,錯位的沖突[J];南風窗;2015年04期

8 樊崇義;;解讀“以審判為中心”的訴訟制度改革[J];中國司法;2015年02期

9 陳瑞華;;論瑕疵證據(jù)補正規(guī)則[J];法學家;2012年02期

10 何家弘;;刑事庭審虛化的實證研究[J];法學家;2011年06期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前2條

1 陳光中;;推進“以審判為中心”改革的幾個問題[N];人民法院報;2015年

2 陳衛(wèi)東;霍文琦;;以審判為中心推動訴訟制度改革[N];中國社會科學報;2014年

相關(guān)博士學位論文 前1條

1 管宇;論控辯平等原則[D];中國政法大學;2006年

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前2條

1 韓亞茹;論刑事審判中心主義在我國的實現(xiàn)路徑[D];山東大學;2015年

2 何葉;辯護律師執(zhí)業(yè)權(quán)利保障機制研究[D];浙江工商大學;2015年

，

本文編號：1649193