捕后羁押必要性审查的基层实践

发布时间：2018-01-30 03:47

本文关键词： 工作机制联动机制风险防控机制考核机制羁押替代措施　出处：《国家检察官学院学报》2013年06期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：捕后羁押必要性审查是监督职权和诉讼职权的统一。实践中,检察机关开展此项工作还存在一些困难:对羁押必要性审查制度认识存在偏颇;内部分工协作联动机制尚未确立;审查案件范围较窄;审查标准、时间和次数不明确;非羁押强制措施适用性不强;考核导向制约工作积极性;未建立不羁押风险防控机制。为此,应进一步提升对羁押必要性审查建议权的认识水平,建立由侦查监督、公诉部门开展实体审查(主导)、监所部门开展形式审查(配合)的审查模式,将案件审查范围扩展到十年有期徒刑以下刑罚的一切案件,进一步明确羁押审查标准、时间和次数,完善羁押替代措施和考核制度,与公安、法院联合建立不羁押风险防控机制。
[Abstract]:The examination of the necessity of custody after arrest is the unity of supervisory authority and litigation authority. In practice, there are still some difficulties for the procuratorial organ to carry out this work: biased understanding of the system of examining the necessity of custody; The linkage mechanism of internal division of labor and cooperation has not been established; The scope of examination of cases is relatively narrow; Review criteria, timing and frequency are unclear; The applicability of non-custodial coercive measures is not strong; The examination direction restricts the work enthusiasm; For this reason, we should further raise the level of understanding of the right to examine and propose the necessity of custody, establish supervision by investigation, and carry out entity review (leading) by the public prosecution department. The mode of formal examination (cooperation) is carried out by the prison department, which extends the scope of the case review to all cases where the penalty of imprisonment is less than 10 years, and further clarifies the standard, time and frequency of the detention review. Improve the detention alternative measures and assessment system, and jointly establish a non-custodial risk prevention and control mechanism with public security and courts.
【作者单位】：北京市石景山区人民检察院;
【分类号】：D925.2
【正文快照】： 我国1996年刑事诉讼法没有将羁押与拘留、逮捕等强制措施相区分,致使羁押在办案中依附于拘留、逮捕的适用,成为这些强制措施的必然后果。同时对被羁押的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人缺乏有效的权利救济机制和独立的羁押必要性审查机制,导致实践中“一捕到底”、“一押到底”成为刑事诉

【参考文献】