中韩国际被判刑人移管法律制度研究

发布时间：2018-03-26 02:05

本文选题：被判刑人　切入点：移管　出处：《中国海洋大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：被判刑人移管制度是指经罪犯本人同意，一国将触犯本国刑法且通过审判被判处剥夺或限制人身自由的外籍罪犯移送给外籍犯的国籍国或其他关联国家，使被判刑人在较为熟悉的环境中执行刑罚以便其顺利改造、重返社会的国际刑事司法互助制度。这一制度是伴随着刑罚国家性的弱化、尊重和保障人权和刑罚执行费用的日益增加等法律现实产生的。它从最大限度的维护被判刑人利益的角度出发，目的是让在国外被判刑的人回到自己最熟悉、对自己教化改造与复归社会最有利的环境中继续服刑，避免因在异国他乡服刑所遭遇的语言文化、饮食习惯、宗教信仰等方面的困难。被判刑人移管制度以被判刑人利益为出发点和落脚点，是这一制度区别于引渡、刑事诉讼移管和刑事判决的承认与执行最为明显、最为根本的特征。除了被判刑人自身，被判刑人移管制度对判刑国和执行国也都带来各种无形的“好处”。为较好的实施这种司法互助制度和保护被判刑人利益，在国际被判刑人移管合作中，一般都遵循条约前置主义、国籍主义、一事不再理原则、判决确定原则、同意原则、双重犯罪原则。作为一种先进和人道化的司法协助形式，被判刑人移管制度越来越受到世界各国的普遍关注，中国和韩国也不例外，但两国在制度设计、立法规模等方面还是存在差异和区别的。首先，从立法上看，韩国目前建立了国内专门立法和国际条约并重的被判刑人移管法律制度；中国尚未制定专门国内立法，主要采纳个案合作为核心的移管被判刑人双边条约的立法模式。其次，从移管条件、程序看，韩国在国内法、国际条约的依托下，被判刑人移管条件、程序等各项规定是较为成熟和全面的；鉴于个案合作的双边条约形式，中国在被判刑人移管的条件、程序方面的法律规定相对笼统、不全面、不统一。再次，从移管审查机构看，韩国在法务部的主导下设置了专门的审查委员会，专职对移管过程中的诸项事宜进行审查；中国目前采纳的是“中央机关”体制，，由司法部牵头负责，联合其他主管机关共同审查移管合作中的诸项事宜。虽然，韩国目前在被判刑人移管方面的法律制度相对全面，但韩国的被判刑人移管现状却不如人意，被判刑人移管合作进展缓慢。结合韩国法律规定和国际上的移管判例，我们可以发现，被判刑人移管制度本身和韩国法律本身都是存在问题和缺陷的。这些问题主要是违宪性问题、国籍主义问题、被判刑人同意问题、相关国家对移管申请的自由裁量权问题和移管申请处理迟延问题。在正视问题后，韩国应尽力采取诸项措施完善这一制度，当然，韩国对被判刑人移管制度的完善对中国将来立法也会产生诸多的启示与指导。
[Abstract]:A system of transfer of sentenced persons means, with the consent of the offender himself, the transfer by a State to the State of nationality or other associated State of a foreign offender who has committed an offence under its criminal law and who has been sentenced to trial for deprivation or restriction of his or her personal liberty, Enabling sentenced persons to carry out sentences in a more familiar environment for their successful rehabilitation and reintegration into the system of international mutual legal assistance in criminal matters... this system is accompanied by the weakening of the penal State, Legal realities such as respect for and protection of human rights and the increasing cost of enforcing penalties arise... from the point of view of maximizing the interests of sentenced persons, with a view to bringing those sentenced abroad back to their best understanding, In the most favorable environment for their education and rehabilitation, they should continue to serve their sentences, and avoid the language, culture and eating habits encountered in serving their sentences in foreign countries. Difficulties in the areas of religious belief and other aspects. The system of transfer of sentenced persons is based on the interests of the sentenced person as its starting point and foothold. It is the system that distinguishes itself from extradition, and that the transfer of criminal proceedings and the recognition and enforcement of criminal sentences are most evident, The most fundamental features... in addition to the sentenced person himself, the system of transfer of sentenced persons also brings intangible "benefits" to both the sentenced State and the State of enforcement... for the better implementation of such a system of mutual legal assistance and the protection of the interests of sentenced persons, In international cooperation on the transfer of sentenced persons, the principles of treaty preposition, nationality doctrine, non bis in idem, determination of judgment, consent and double criminality are generally followed. As an advanced and humanized form of mutual legal assistance, the system of transfer of sentenced persons has attracted more and more attention from all over the world. China and South Korea are no exception, but the two countries are designing the system. There are still differences and differences in the scope of legislation. First, from a legislative point of view, Korea has now established a legal system for the transfer of sentenced persons with equal emphasis on domestic special legislation and international treaties; China has not yet formulated special domestic legislation. It mainly adopts the legislative model of bilateral treaties on transfer of sentenced persons with the core of case cooperation. Secondly, from the point of view of transfer conditions and procedures, Korea relies on domestic laws and international treaties to transfer sentenced persons. Procedures and other provisions are more mature and comprehensive; in view of the bilateral treaty form of cooperation in individual cases, China's legal provisions on the transfer of sentenced persons are relatively general, incomplete and inconsistent. Once again, From the point of view of the transfer review body, Korea has set up a special review committee under the leadership of the Ministry of Justice to review all matters in the process of transfer of management. At present, China has adopted a "central authority" system, with the Ministry of Justice taking the lead. In conjunction with other competent authorities to jointly review the transfer of management cooperation in the various matters. Although Korea's current legal system on the transfer of sentenced persons is relatively comprehensive, the current situation of transfer of sentenced persons in Korea is not satisfactory, and cooperation in the transfer of sentenced persons is progressing slowly. We can find that both the system of transfer of sentenced persons and the Korean law itself have problems and shortcomings. These problems are mainly unconstitutional issues, nationality issues, and the consent of sentenced persons. The issue of discretion and delays in the processing of transfer applications in relevant countries. After facing the problem squarely, Korea should do its utmost to improve this system by taking various measures, of course, The perfection of the system of transfer of sentenced persons in South Korea will also bring a lot of enlightenment and guidance to China's legislation in the future.
【学位授予单位】：中国海洋大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D931.26;D925.2

【参考文献】