本文選題：被害人 + 刑事訴訟權(quán)利　； 參考：《吉林大學》2016年博士論文

【摘要】：本文以被害人刑事訴訟權(quán)利為研究對象,以我國刑事訴訟法修訂為背景,綜合運用比較分析與價值分析的方法,反思我國刑事訴訟立法及司法實踐中對被害人刑事訴訟權(quán)利保護的不足及其問題的根源。并從刑事訴訟構(gòu)造及刑事訴權(quán)等方面分析導致這種情況的原因,提出在我國當前刑事訴訟模式下,完善被害人權(quán)利保護的思路。本文寫作目的可以分為三個層次:第一層次為完善我國的被害人刑事訴訟權(quán)利保護提供解決方案;第二層次為我國的刑事訴訟提供更為合理的訴訟模式;最后為我國的人權(quán)保護提供新的解決思路。筆者通過對被害人刑事訴權(quán)與刑事訴訟權(quán)利之間的內(nèi)在聯(lián)系、刑事訴訟構(gòu)造與被害人刑事訴訟權(quán)利之間的關(guān)系進行了研究,發(fā)現(xiàn)在我國現(xiàn)行的刑事訴訟模式下,公訴機關(guān)與被害人在刑事訴訟中的分歧是難免的�，F(xiàn)行的刑事訴訟模式不能充分反映被害人對刑事訴訟的期待和請求,可能忽視被害人在刑事訴訟中的權(quán)利,甚至造成對被害人的“二次傷害”。刑事案件的復雜性、隱蔽性使得僅依靠被害人自身能力,很難實現(xiàn)對刑事犯罪的有效追訴,因此,國家公訴有其現(xiàn)實的合理性。然而,在國家主義思想的影響下,國家和社會的利益被認為高于被害人的私人利益,因此,國家在進行公訴時,以維護國家和社會的公共利益作為首要的出發(fā)點。而這必將與被害人的期待產(chǎn)生分歧。當被害人的訴訟請求不能為公訴采納甚至為國家公訴忽視時,被害人與公訴機關(guān)甚至與國家之間的矛盾就此產(chǎn)生了。我國近年不斷出現(xiàn)的上訪、鬧訪現(xiàn)象有相當一部分根源于此。文章從訴的利益的角度進行了分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)在刑事訴訟中受到犯罪行為侵害的不僅包括國家與社會的公共利益,還有作為犯罪直接承受者的被害人的私人利益。因此,刑事訴訟中的控訴應當包括國家之訴與被害人之訴,也即公訴與私訴。近現(xiàn)代以來,在刑事訴訟中國家公訴主義成為現(xiàn)代各國刑事訴訟的主流,被害人的私訴被排除于刑事訴訟(公訴案件)之外。因此,在現(xiàn)有訴訟模式下,如果能使私訴以適當?shù)姆绞交貧w刑事訴訟,讓被害人更有效的參與公訴案件的訴訟活動,那么,被害人與國家之間的矛盾也就可以在一定程度上化解。但是,讓私訴回歸刑事訴訟的一個基本前提是,不會對犯罪嫌疑人、被告人造成雙重負擔,不會導致控辯力量的失衡。本文預期的創(chuàng)新之處在于,通過對現(xiàn)有的刑事訴訟構(gòu)造理論進行改造,使之成為一種更加科學合理的刑事訴訟模式。筆者提出了建立一種新的刑事訴訟構(gòu)造——“四元三極”刑事訴訟構(gòu)造。這種訴訟構(gòu)造在肯定了控、辯、裁作為刑事訴訟基本職能的前提下,對控訴職能進行了深入分析。以往我國在刑事訴訟中,控訴職能由公訴機關(guān)掌握,被害人在控訴活動中所起到的實際作用甚微,這也是被害人的刑事訴訟權(quán)利不能得到有效保障的根源。因此,在筆者提出的這種刑事訴訟構(gòu)造下,將刑事控訴具體細分為被害人私訴與國家公訴。在不額外增加控訴權(quán)利的情況下,由公訴機關(guān)與被害人在同一訴訟程序中分別提出各自的控訴請求。這兩種控訴方向一致,但出發(fā)點和具體要求不盡相同。這樣不僅可以使被害人能夠在刑事訴訟中真正實現(xiàn)其當事人地位,而且也不會導致刑事控訴權(quán)的擴張�！八脑龢O”刑事訴訟構(gòu)造的價值在于將刑事控訴權(quán)進行了準確的分配,既避免了公訴遮蔽私訴所導致的侵害被害人利益的情況出現(xiàn),也防止了私訴不能參與控訴的缺陷。而且,這種訴訟構(gòu)造也充分體現(xiàn)了當事人的利益處分自由,與恢復性司法、協(xié)商性司法的許多原理在根本上是一致的。以這種構(gòu)造思想為指導,筆者對我國刑事訴訟立法中,被害人刑事訴訟權(quán)利保護不夠完善的地方進行了分析,并提出了相應的完善建議。本文認為,作為受到刑事犯罪直接侵害的主體,被害人在刑事訴訟中的地位和作用不可忽視。如何在保證被害人刑事訴訟權(quán)利的同時,兼顧訴訟的公平與效率,并且不違背刑事訴訟中控辯平衡的基本原則,這也是本文希望能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)的目標�；诖�,本文提出在“四元三極”刑事訴訟構(gòu)造下,建立“公訴為主、私訴為輔”的新訴訟模式,實現(xiàn)對被害人權(quán)利的合理保護。
[Abstract]:Taking the victim's right of criminal procedure as the research object, taking the amendment of the criminal procedure law of our country as the background and using the method of comparative analysis and value analysis, this paper rethinks the deficiency of the protection of the right of the victim's criminal litigation in the criminal procedure legislation and judicial practice of our country and the root of the problem, and from the criminal litigation structure and the criminal litigant right. The reasons for this situation are analyzed, and the ideas of improving the protection of the rights of the victims are put forward under the current mode of criminal procedure in China. The purpose of this article can be divided into three levels: the first level provides a solution to improve the protection of the rights of the victims in our country, and the second level provides more reasonable for the criminal proceedings in our country. In the end, it provides a new solution for the protection of human rights in China. Through the internal relationship between the victim's criminal litigious right and the right of criminal litigation, the author studies the relationship between the criminal litigation structure and the rights of the victim's criminal litigation, and finds that under the current criminal litigation mode of our country, the public prosecution organ and the victim The differences in criminal proceedings are unavoidable. The current mode of criminal procedure can not fully reflect the victim's expectation and request for criminal proceedings. It may neglect the rights of the victim in the criminal proceedings and even cause the "two injury" to the victim. The complexity of the criminal case, and the concealment of the victim's own ability, can only rely on the victim's own ability. It is difficult to realize the effective prosecution of criminal offences, therefore, national public prosecution has its realistic rationality. However, under the influence of nationalism, the interests of the state and society are considered to be higher than the private interests of the victims. Therefore, the state and the public interests of the state and society are the primary starting point for the state and the public interests to be maintained in public prosecution. There is a disagreement with the expectation of the victim. When the lawsuit request of the victim can not be adopted for the public prosecution and even the state prosecution is ignored, the contradiction between the victim and the public prosecution and even the state has come into being. In recent years, a considerable number of visits in our country have come from this. The article has been carried out from the point of view of the interests of the prosecution. It is found that the criminal action infringed on the criminal action not only includes the public interests of the state and the society, but also the private interests of the victims who are the victims of the crime directly. Therefore, the prosecution in the criminal procedure should include the state lawsuit and the victim's lawsuit, that is, public prosecution and private prosecution. Public prosecution has become the mainstream of modern criminal proceedings in various countries. The private prosecution of the victim is excluded from the criminal procedure (public prosecution case). Therefore, under the existing litigation mode, if the private prosecution can return to the criminal procedure in a proper way and let the victim participate more effectively in the prosecution case, the spear between the victim and the state will be more effective. The shield can be resolved to a certain extent. However, a basic premise for the return of the private prosecution to the criminal procedure is that it will not cause a double burden on the criminal suspects and the defendants, and will not lead to the imbalance of the power of the accusation. The author puts forward the establishment of a new criminal procedure structure, "four yuan and three poles" in criminal procedure structure. This litigation structure has made a thorough analysis of the function of prosecution under the premise of affirming the basic functions of the criminal litigation. The actual role of the victim in the prosecution activities is very small, which is also the root of the criminal litigation rights of the victim. Therefore, under the structure of the criminal procedure proposed by the author, the criminal prosecution is subdivided into the private prosecution and the state public prosecution. Under the circumstances, the public prosecution organs and the victims in the same proceedings put forward their respective complaints. The two accusations are in the same direction, but the starting points and specific requirements are different. This will not only enable the victim to truly realize its litigant status in the criminal proceedings, but also will not lead to the expansion of the right of criminal prosecution. "Four The value of the structure of the criminal procedure of the yuan and three poles "lies in the accurate allocation of the right of criminal prosecution, which avoids the occurrence of the infringement of the interests of the victims caused by the public prosecution, and also prevents the imperfection of the private prosecution from being unable to participate in the prosecution. Moreover, the litigation structure also fully embodies the freedom of the parties' disposition of interests and the restorative nature of the litigants. Judicature, the many principles of negotiated judicature are fundamentally consistent. Guided by this structural thought, the author analyses the inadequate protection of the rights of the victims in criminal proceedings in our country, and puts forward the corresponding suggestions. This article believes that, as the subject of the direct infringement of criminal offences, the author is victimization. The status and role of people in criminal proceedings can not be ignored. How to ensure the rights of the victims in criminal proceedings, take into account the fairness and efficiency of the litigation, and do not violate the basic principles of the balance of the accusation and defense in the criminal proceedings. This is the goal that this article hopes to achieve. Based on this, this paper puts forward the structure of "four yuan and three poles" in criminal procedure. Next, we should set up a new litigation mode of "public prosecution is the main form and private litigation is subsidiary", so as to realize the reasonable protection of victims' rights.

【學位授予單位】：吉林大學
【學位級別】：博士
【學位授予年份】：2016
【分類號】：D925.2
，

本文編號：1820562