论我国检察权的司法性根基及其司法化改革

发布时间：2018-04-16 07:21

本文选题：检察权 + 司法　；参考：《复旦大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：上世纪90年代末,学界开始对检察机关和检察权进行反思,先后对检察权的性质和权能等问题展开了广泛的研究和论战。这一反思和论战从学界弥漫到实务界,从诉讼法专业蔓延到宪法、法理专业,前后持续十来年,形成了行政权说、司法权说、双重属性说和法律监督权说等观点。本文通过反思以往研究当中的不足和检察权实践当中的困境,彻底分析了检察权性质的认定问题：检察权性质的定位应当着眼于构建我国法治支点的高度,将它定位为司法权,增强检察机关的独立性和检察权行使的程序正当性。本文同时主张以检察权权能为单位对检察权进行复合理解：检察权是一项包括公诉权、审判监督权、检察侦查权等在内的权力束；这一权力束的性质并不是单一纯粹的,其中公诉权、审判监督权等明显具有司法性质,而检察自侦权等则明显具有行政性质。认清这些子项权力的属性,并作出准确的区分,是优化检察权建设的前提。对于检察权当中的司法性权能,应当加强独立性和程序性改造；对于检察权当中的行政性权能,应当遵循权力制约的基本规律加以审查和规制。全文共60000字左右,分为五章：第一章检察权性质：多维视角与复合理解。本章从政治学的角度明确区分司法权和行政权的差别与关系,分别从应然和实然的认识路径对检察权的定性问题进行了分析,认为检察权同时具有司法性和行政性的属性,并且出于我国法治支点建构的考虑,主张将检察权作为司法权来塑造,增强它的独立性和程序正当性。第二章中国检察权司法化改造论纲。本章分别考察检察权各项权能的属性,认为公诉权和审判监督权作为司法权的重要成分,应当成为进行检察权司法化改造的重点领域。对于这些权力的司法化应当做到两个方面：一要在保持检察一体的同时,实现检察官独立；二是要通过权力程序的构建实现检察权运行的正当化。第三章到第五章是本文的分论,分别就公诉权、检察监督权和检察侦查权的定性和改造方向进行论述。公诉权是独立行使的权力,在起诉便宜主义下,不管决定提起公诉还是做出不起诉决定,都是对侦查终结的案件作出的裁断,更符合司法权的特点。应当通过不起诉听证制度和预审制度增强它的司法性。检察监督权行使中的适法裁量性因素,决定了检察监督权的司法属性。这些监督权应当通过监督关系主体的利益分化和监督程序的细化来实现法治功能。检察侦查权实乃行政性权力,追求侦查效率的目的要求此项权力必须遵从上命下从的组织方式；同时,为了防范异化,必须通过异体审查与全面审查对其进行司法控制。
[Abstract]:At the end of 1990s, scholars began to reflect on procuratorial organs and procuratorial powers, and began to conduct extensive researches and debates on the nature and power of procuratorial powers.This introspection and controversy pervaded from the academic circles to the practical circles, from the procedural law specialty to the constitution, the jurisprudence specialty, lasted for more than ten years, formed the views of administrative power theory, judicial power theory, dual attribute theory and legal supervision power theory.By reflecting on the shortcomings of previous studies and the difficulties in the practice of procuratorial power, this paper thoroughly analyzes the problem of the nature of procuratorial power: the orientation of the nature of procuratorial power should focus on constructing the height of the fulcrum of the rule of law in our country, and position it as judicial power.To enhance the independence of procuratorial organs and the exercise of procuratorial power legitimate procedures.At the same time, this paper advocates that procuratorial power is a power bundle including public prosecution power, trial supervision power, procuratorial investigation power and so on, and the nature of this power bundle is not simple and pure.Among them, the power of public prosecution and the power of judicial supervision are obviously judicial, while the power of procuratorial self-investigation is obviously of the nature of administration.It is the premise to optimize the construction of procuratorial power to recognize the attributes of these subitems and make an accurate distinction.The judicial power in procuratorial power should be strengthened and the procedural reform should be strengthened, and the administrative power in procuratorial power should be examined and regulated according to the basic law of power restriction.The full text consists of about 60000 words, which is divided into five chapters:Chapter one: the nature of procuratorial power: multi-dimensional perspective and complex understanding.This chapter clearly distinguishes the difference and relation between judicial power and administrative power from the angle of political science, analyzes the qualitative problem of procuratorial power from the proper and realistic cognitive path, and thinks that procuratorial power has the attribute of judicature and administration.Considering the construction of the fulcrum of the rule of law in our country, we advocate that procuratorial power should be shaped as judicial power to enhance its independence and procedural legitimacy.The second chapter discusses the judicial reform of procuratorial power in China.This chapter investigates the attributes of the procuratorial power and concludes that the prosecutorial power and the judicial supervision power, as an important component of the judicial power, should become the key areas for the judicial reform of the procuratorial power.There are two aspects to the judicature of these powers: one is to realize the procurator's independence while maintaining the procuratorial integrity; the other is to realize the legitimacy of the procuratorial power operation through the construction of the power procedure.The third chapter to the fifth chapter is the division of this paper, respectively on the right of public prosecution, procuratorial supervision and prosecutorial investigation power of the qualitative and reform direction.The right of public prosecution is an independent exercise of power. Under the doctrine of inexpensive prosecution, whether the decision to prosecute or the decision not to prosecute, is the conclusion of the case of the end of investigation, more in line with the characteristics of judicial power.Its judicial character should be enhanced by the non-prosecution hearing system and the pre-hearing system.The judicial attribute of procuratorial supervision power is determined by the discretion of law in the exercise of procuratorial supervision power.These supervisory powers should realize the function of ruling by law by dividing the interests of the subject of supervision relationship and refining the supervision procedure.The power of procuratorial investigation is actually an administrative power, and the purpose of pursuing the efficiency of investigation requires that the power must follow the way of organization under the order of the superior; at the same time, in order to prevent alienation, judicial control must be carried out through heterogeneity examination and comprehensive examination.
【学位授予单位】：复旦大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D926.3

【参考文献】