刑事庭前会议制度的运行困境及出路

发布时间：2018-03-02 12:00

本文选题：刑事庭前会议　切入点：运行困境　出处：《安徽大学》2016年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：2012年3月14日,全国人大第十一届五次会议审议通过了《关于修改中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法的决定》,明确规定了将庭前会议制度纳入刑事诉讼法当中。庭前会议作为审查起诉到审判的中间环节,打破了从起诉直接向审判过度的诉讼流程,成为了新刑事诉讼法出台后的一大亮点,备受理论解和实务界的关注,是一项具有中国特色的刑事诉讼制度。也预示着我国程序法的进步,已经慢慢步入科学化、专门化的轨道上,对提高诉讼效率、实现控辩平衡和程序公正起着不可磨灭的作用。在理论界得到了一致的肯定,甚至有学者做出了更高的评价,指出庭前会议制度的构建是整个审判程序改革中一颗耀眼的明珠。①至今庭前会议制度已实施四年,著名的薄熙来案、刘志军案和李天案件都召开了庭前会议,对于加快审判进程、提高庭审效率、实现程序和实体上的公正、进而保障当事人权利等方面都起了不可估量的效果。但由于实施实现相对较短,相比法律健全的国家的完善的庭前会议制度我国还在体验阶段,而且到目前为止只有《刑诉法》第182条、最高院《关于适用中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法解释》183条、184条对于庭前会议制度做出了简单、粗糙的规定,对会议的主体、内容、适用范围以及最终的效力及其监督机制上的规定都有诸多不足,导致在各地实施的过程中产生了不同的做法,司法实践中问题突出,有的地方召开庭前会议不仅没有达到最初的目的,有的甚至与之相违背。本文包括四个部分,主要围绕庭前会议制度在实践运行中存在四个方面的困境展开叙述,第一部分阐述庭前会议制度的主体问题,主要包括启动主体、参加主体和被告人参与权三个方面存在的问题,接着就国外关于庭前会议中主体问题做介绍,进而针对我国现有主体上存在的问题提出解决性措施。第二部分主要论述庭前会议制度的适用问题,表现在适用率低、适用范围不明确两个方面,并针对问题提出建设性的意见。第三部分介绍庭前会议在内容上存在的缺陷,主要有程序性问题操作不明确、实体性问题的处理不明确以及证据的处理问题不明确三个方面,接着就证据问题介绍国外的相关规定,进而提出解决措施,第四部分讲述庭前会议制度的效力及其监督机制问题,主要表现在会议的效力处于待确定状态、缺乏有效的监督机制,并就这一问题提出建议,明确会议的效力、制定严格的监督机制,以更好的完善我国的庭前会议制度,使之为正式的庭审做准备。
[Abstract]:March 14th 2012, The Fifth session of the 11th National people's Congress deliberated and adopted the decision on the revision of the Criminal procedure Law of the people's Republic of China, which clearly stipulates the incorporation of the system of pre-trial meetings into the criminal procedure law. To the middle of the trial, Breaking the litigation process from prosecution to trial, it has become a bright spot after the promulgation of the new Criminal procedure Law, and has attracted the attention of the theoretical and practical circles. It is a criminal procedure system with Chinese characteristics. It also indicates the progress of procedural law in our country. It has gradually entered the track of science and specialization, which will improve the efficiency of litigation. Achieving the balance between prosecution and defense and procedural justice plays an indelible role. It has been unanimously affirmed in the theoretical circle, and some scholars have even made higher comments. It is pointed out that the construction of the pre-court conference system is a dazzling pearl in the whole reform of the trial procedure. Up to now, the pre-court conference system has been implemented for four years. The famous cases of Bo Xilai, Liu Zhijun and Li Tian have all held pre-court meetings. It has played an inestimable effect in speeding up the trial process, improving the efficiency of the trial, realizing procedural and substantive justice, and thus safeguarding the rights of the parties. However, due to the relatively short implementation, Compared with the perfect pre-trial meeting system in a country with sound laws, China is still in the stage of experience, and so far only Article 182 of the Criminal procedure Law has been adopted. The Supreme Court's interpretation of the Application of the Criminal procedure Law of the people's Republic of China 183 articles 184 have made simple and crude provisions on the system of pre-court meetings, with regard to the subject and content of the meetings. There are many deficiencies in the scope of application and the ultimate effectiveness and supervision mechanism, which lead to different practices in the process of implementation in various places, and the problems in judicial practice are prominent. Some places not only failed to achieve the original purpose, some even went against it. This paper includes four parts, mainly focusing on the difficulties of four aspects in the practice of the pre-court conference system. The first part describes the main issues of the pretrial conference system, mainly including the starting of the main body, the participation of the main body and the defendant's right to participate in three aspects of the problems, and then on the subject of the pre-court meeting in foreign countries to make an introduction. The second part mainly discusses the application of the pre-court meeting system, which is manifested in the low rate of application, the scope of application is not clear. The third part introduces the defects in the content of the pre-trial meeting, which mainly include three aspects: the operation of procedural issues is not clear, the handling of substantive issues is not clear, and the handling of evidence is not clear. Then introduce the relevant provisions of foreign countries on the question of evidence, and then put forward the settlement measures. Part 4th describes the effectiveness of the pre-court meeting system and its supervision mechanism, which is mainly manifested in that the effectiveness of the meeting is in a state to be determined. Lack of effective supervision mechanism, and put forward suggestions on this issue, clear the effectiveness of the conference, formulate a strict supervision mechanism, in order to better improve the system of pre-trial meetings in China, so as to prepare for the formal trial.
【学位授予单位】：安徽大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】