当前位置:主页 > 法律论文 > 诉讼法论文 >

特别没收程序在追逃追赃中的适用

发布时间:2018-02-28 09:28

  本文关键词: 特别没收程序 民事没收 资产分享 追逃追赃 出处:《浙江大学》2017年硕士论文 论文类型:学位论文


【摘要】:2012年新修订《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》,新增了 "犯罪嫌疑人、被告人逃匿、死亡案件违法所得的没收程序"(以下简称"特别没收程序")。在严格的程序限定下,针对贪污贿赂犯罪、恐怖活动等重大犯罪案件,可以不经定罪,对与犯罪相关的违法所得进行没收。在很大程度上,中国追逃追赃的力度得到增强,效率得到提高,尤其是通过加大追赃力度促进追逃的顺利开展,值得肯定。特别没收程序在司法实践中,也涌现出一些成功案例,比如"李华波案"。但是,《刑事诉讼法》对于特别没收程序的规定,过于粗疏,即使两高出台了相应的司法解释,同样无法完全解决实践中遇到的问题。立法对于特别没收程序的性质、证明标准、举证责任、违法所得的界定、权利的救济途径等,仍然需要补强。放眼世界,美国的民事没收制度、英国《2002年犯罪收益追缴法》(以下简称"《犯罪收益追缴法》")、澳大利亚《2002年犯罪收益追缴法》(以下简称"《犯罪收益追缴法》"),都为完善我国的特别没收程序,提供了有益的借鉴。
[Abstract]:In 2012, the Criminal procedure Law of the people's Republic of China was revised to include a new "confiscation procedure for illegal proceeds of criminal suspects, defendants and death cases" (hereinafter referred to as "special confiscation procedures"). With regard to major criminal cases such as embezzlement, bribery, terrorist activities and other major crimes, illegal proceeds related to crimes can be confiscated without conviction. To a large extent, China's pursuit of and pursuit of stolen goods has been strengthened and its efficiency has been improved. In particular, it is commendable to promote the smooth development of pursuit by stepping up the pursuit of stolen goods. Some successful cases have emerged in the judicial practice of the special confiscation procedure. For example, the "Li Huapo case." however, the provisions of the "Criminal procedure Law" regarding special confiscation procedures are too careless, even though the two high levels have issued corresponding judicial interpretations. Similarly, the problems encountered in practice cannot be completely solved. Legislation still needs to strengthen the nature of the special confiscation procedure, the standard of proof, the burden of proof, the definition of illegal income, the remedy of rights, and so on. The civil confiscation system in the United States, the British Criminal proceeds recovery Act of 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the proceeds of Crime recovery Act") and Australia's "Criminal proceeds recovery Act of 2002" (hereinafter referred to as "the proceeds of Crime recovery Act") are all intended to perfect the special confiscation procedures in our country. It provides useful reference.
【学位授予单位】:浙江大学
【学位级别】:硕士
【学位授予年份】:2017
【分类号】:D925.2

【参考文献】

相关期刊论文 前10条

1 彭新林;;腐败犯罪缺席审判制度之构建[J];法学;2016年12期

2 赵建波;;违法所得没收程序在我国的适用、问题与前景[J];河北法学;2015年09期

3 张磊;;腐败犯罪境外追逃追赃的反思与对策[J];当代法学;2015年03期

4 赵秉志;张磊;;赖昌星案件法律问题研究[J];政法论坛;2014年04期

5 郭大磊;吕彪;;犯罪嫌疑人、被告人逃匿、死亡案件违法所得没收程序适用问题研究[J];犯罪研究;2014年02期

6 黄风;;论“没收个人全部财产”刑罚的废止——以追缴犯罪资产的国际合作为视角[J];法商研究;2014年01期

7 熊秋红;;从特别没收程序的性质看制度完善[J];法学;2013年09期

8 陆海;;也论构建我国追回腐败资产的法律机制[J];法学评论;2013年03期

9 孙煜华;;涉案财产没收程序如何才能经受宪法拷问[J];法学;2012年06期

10 万毅;;独立没收程序的证据法难题及其破解[J];法学;2012年04期



本文编号:1546739

资料下载
论文发表

本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/susongfa/1546739.html


Copyright(c)文论论文网All Rights Reserved | 网站地图 |

版权申明:资料由用户4f0cc***提供,本站仅收录摘要或目录,作者需要删除请E-mail邮箱bigeng88@qq.com