国际刑事法院证据规则研究
发布时间：2018-10-22 11:41
【摘要】：人类和平和国际社会正义需要国际刑事法院的保障。为保障国际人权、打击国际刑事犯罪而于1998年开放签署的《国际刑事法院罗马规约》(下称《罗马规约》),是国际刑事诉讼一个崭新的里程碑。截至2016年,国际社会已有124个国家成为《罗马规约》的缔约国。随着国际刑法的发展,证据制度在审判实践中逐渐形成了自己的特色。本论文分为四大部分:第一部分,国际刑事证据规则概述,主要阐述几个基本概念及国际刑事证据制度的历史发展。本文在国际法框架下对国际刑法和其他学科进行了定义和诠释,从历史角度探寻证据制度发展的脉络,主要是以几次国际刑事审判为内容说明国际刑事法院证据规则形成的理论和实践基础。第二部分,国际刑事法院混合式证据规则。首先是对《罗马规约》程序与证据规则的概述,其次介绍国际刑事法院证据规则的几个基本特点,主要包括检察官的证据披露义务、法官在证据审查中的地位和作用和预审分庭对证据的独特调查权。本部分的重点是国际刑事法院混合式证据模式,主要探寻两大法系证据制度的区别、国际刑事法院对两者优秀经验的采纳及其本身证据模式的形成,深刻剖析国际刑事法院混合式证据模式形成的原因,从而确认国际刑事证据规则从最初仅体现英美法系证据模式转化为兼顾大陆法系证据自由心证的混合式证据模式。在国际刑事法院的司法实践中,一方面坚持了证据自由原则,同时赋予了审判庭选择权。国际刑事法院的证据规则不是完全遵循英美法系对证据是否可采纳采取严格的限定模式,而其本身是对证据是否可采采取宽容的态度,这种做法是向大陆法系倾斜。也就是说,对证据是否可采纳法院的自由裁量权较大。第三部分,国际刑事法院证据规则的适用,主要阐述证人制度、采用特别手段作证规则,从不同角度介绍了国际刑事法院证据规则的适用。第四部分,国际刑事法院证据规则对中国刑事证据制度发展的借鉴。从中国现行刑事证据制度的现状出发,探寻国际刑事法院的优秀做法,且指出当前应从立法角度完善和建立具有中国特色的刑事证据制度。
[Abstract]:Peace for mankind and justice for the international community need the guarantees of the International Criminal Court. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (hereinafter referred to as the Rome Statute), which was opened and signed in 1998 to protect international human rights and combat international criminal crimes, is a new milestone in international criminal proceedings. By 2016, 124 countries had become parties to the Rome Statute. With the development of international criminal law, evidence system has gradually formed its own characteristics in trial practice. This paper is divided into four parts: the first part, the introduction of international criminal evidence rules, mainly expounds several basic concepts and the historical development of international criminal evidence system. This paper defines and interprets international criminal law and other disciplines under the framework of international law, and explores the development of evidence system from the historical point of view. It mainly explains the theoretical and practical basis of the formation of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court (ICC) by taking several international criminal trials as the content. The second part, the mixed evidence rules of the International Criminal Court. The first part is an overview of the rules of procedure and evidence of the Rome Statute, followed by an introduction of several basic features of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court, including the obligation of the Prosecutor to disclose evidence. The position and role of the judges in the examination of evidence and the unique investigative power of the Pre-Trial Chamber in respect of evidence. This part focuses on the mixed evidence model of the International Criminal Court, mainly explores the differences between the two legal systems, the International Criminal Court's adoption of the two outstanding experience and the formation of its own evidence model. This paper deeply analyzes the reasons for the formation of the mixed evidence model of the International Criminal Court, and thus confirms that the international criminal evidence rules have changed from the evidence model of the Anglo-American legal system to the mixed evidence model which takes into account the evidence free evidence in the continental law system. In the judicial practice of the International Criminal Court, on the one hand, the principle of freedom of evidence is adhered to, at the same time, the trial court is given the right to choose. The rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court do not follow the strict restrictive mode of admissibility of evidence in Anglo-American law system, but it is a tolerant attitude towards admissibility of evidence, which is inclined to continental law system. That is to say, the discretion of the court on admissibility of evidence is greater. The third part, the application of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court, mainly expounds the system of witnesses, uses special means to testify rules, and introduces the application of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court from different angles. The fourth part, the evidence rules of the International Criminal Court for the development of China's criminal evidence system. Starting from the present situation of China's current criminal evidence system, this paper explores the excellent practice of the International Criminal Court, and points out that the criminal evidence system with Chinese characteristics should be perfected and established from the angle of legislation.
【学位授予单位】：辽宁大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D997.9
[Abstract]:Peace for mankind and justice for the international community need the guarantees of the International Criminal Court. The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (hereinafter referred to as the Rome Statute), which was opened and signed in 1998 to protect international human rights and combat international criminal crimes, is a new milestone in international criminal proceedings. By 2016, 124 countries had become parties to the Rome Statute. With the development of international criminal law, evidence system has gradually formed its own characteristics in trial practice. This paper is divided into four parts: the first part, the introduction of international criminal evidence rules, mainly expounds several basic concepts and the historical development of international criminal evidence system. This paper defines and interprets international criminal law and other disciplines under the framework of international law, and explores the development of evidence system from the historical point of view. It mainly explains the theoretical and practical basis of the formation of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court (ICC) by taking several international criminal trials as the content. The second part, the mixed evidence rules of the International Criminal Court. The first part is an overview of the rules of procedure and evidence of the Rome Statute, followed by an introduction of several basic features of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court, including the obligation of the Prosecutor to disclose evidence. The position and role of the judges in the examination of evidence and the unique investigative power of the Pre-Trial Chamber in respect of evidence. This part focuses on the mixed evidence model of the International Criminal Court, mainly explores the differences between the two legal systems, the International Criminal Court's adoption of the two outstanding experience and the formation of its own evidence model. This paper deeply analyzes the reasons for the formation of the mixed evidence model of the International Criminal Court, and thus confirms that the international criminal evidence rules have changed from the evidence model of the Anglo-American legal system to the mixed evidence model which takes into account the evidence free evidence in the continental law system. In the judicial practice of the International Criminal Court, on the one hand, the principle of freedom of evidence is adhered to, at the same time, the trial court is given the right to choose. The rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court do not follow the strict restrictive mode of admissibility of evidence in Anglo-American law system, but it is a tolerant attitude towards admissibility of evidence, which is inclined to continental law system. That is to say, the discretion of the court on admissibility of evidence is greater. The third part, the application of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court, mainly expounds the system of witnesses, uses special means to testify rules, and introduces the application of the rules of evidence of the International Criminal Court from different angles. The fourth part, the evidence rules of the International Criminal Court for the development of China's criminal evidence system. Starting from the present situation of China's current criminal evidence system, this paper explores the excellent practice of the International Criminal Court, and points out that the criminal evidence system with Chinese characteristics should be perfected and established from the angle of legislation.
【学位授予单位】：辽宁大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D997.9
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 施鹏鹏;;刑事诉讼中的证据自由及其限制[J];浙江社会科学;2010年06期
2 宋英辉;;两大法系国家刑事诉讼改革中的趋同性[J];人民检察;2010年11期
3 熊秋红;;刑事证人作证制度之反思——以对质权为中心的分析[J];中国政法大学学报;2009年05期
4 王秀梅;;国际刑事审判的司法理念——透视国际刑事法院审理的第一案[J];吉林大学社会科学学报;2007年06期
5 朱文奇;;中国是否应加入国际刑事法院(上)[J];湖北社会科学;2007年10期
6 喻贵英;;析美国反对常设国际刑事法院的理由和举措[J];法律科学.西北政法学院学报;2006年04期
7 朱淑丽;;纽伦堡审判面临的困境及其解决[J];华东政法学院学报;2006年03期
8 任鸣 ,李国慧;国际刑事审判机构中的“电子法庭”——访前南国际刑庭刘大群法官[J];法律适用;2005年05期
9 龙宗智;国际刑事法院检察官的地位与功能研究[J];现代法学;2003年03期
10 凌岩;卢旺达国际法庭印象——一位中国女学者的工作札记[J];法律与生活;2000年09期
相关硕士学位论文 前1条
1 王桂s，
本文编号：2287055
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/guojifa/2287055.html
