刑事庭前准备程序研究

发布时间：2018-03-10 10:00

本文选题：庭前准备　切入点：庭前会议　出处：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：2012年《刑事诉讼法》对我国刑事庭前准备程序进行了完善，强调了当事人的参与性，确立并完善了“中国式”庭前会议制度，适度吸收并借鉴了当事人主义模式下的庭前程序的部分做法，使庭前准备程序更趋向于正当和完整。但由于庭前准备程序在我国的刑事审判实践中尚属新生事物，与之相关的理论研究不足，再加上立法的不完善以及配套制度的缺失使得该程序缺少可操作性，未能充分实现其建立公正、高效的刑事诉讼审判机制，保证当事人权利，促进程序公正并实现有限诉讼资源优化配置的应有价值功能。本文采取比较研究、实证研究的方法，比较分析英、美、法等国的庭前准备程序，以新《刑事诉讼法》和最高人民法院以及最高人民检察院的相关司法解释为依据，结合我国多地已有的刑事庭前准备程序的司法实践，，着重探讨该程序的具体内容，价值功能、完善路径等方面。以既有的庭前会议为出发点，力求建立符合我国国情的刑事庭前准备程序。本文正文分以下四个部分：第一部分对刑事庭前准备程序的含义、特征、价值功能进行了研究。刑事庭前准备程序与刑事审前程序是不同的概念，后者是建立在审判中心主义上的概念。庭前准备程序因是否包含公诉审查程序而有广义和狭义之分，本文研究的是狭义的庭前准备程序。完备的庭前准备程有利于刑事案件的公正审判，提高审判效率以及保障当事人的诉讼权利，实现案件的有效分流以节约司法资源。第二部分对我国刑事庭前准备程序的现状进行分析。对立法的相关规定进行梳理，得出我国目前的刑事庭前准备程序的主要内容。分析当前司法实践中出现的问题及其成因。第三部分对域外进行考察研究。通过比较分析英美法系当事人主义模式、大陆法系职权主义模式、日本混合主义模式下的庭前准备程序，得出可借鉴之处。各国的刑事庭前准备程序基本目的都在于保障审判集中连续进行，以实现审判的公正和效率；在具体的准备事项上都包括证据知悉、证据保全与调取、排除非法证据、整理证据和争点、被告人答辩与案件分流等。第四部分对如何完善我国的刑事庭前准备程序提出了现实和期待目标。完善刑事庭前准备程序应坚持公正效率兼顾原则；有效衔接主审判程序原则；程序参与原则。以完善我国目前庭前会议制度为现实目标，对其适用范围、参与主体、证据功能审查等方面作进一步完善讨论。以构建符合我国国情的刑事庭前准备程序为期待目标，完善庭前准备程序的程序分流机制以及其他准备工作，并建议将立案庭的职能扩大，在其中设立“庭前准备工作组”，将庭前准备程序与正式庭审程序的主持者分离。
[Abstract]:In 2012, the Criminal procedure Law perfected the preparatory procedure before the criminal court in our country, emphasized the participation of the parties, established and perfected the "Chinese style" system of the pre-court meeting. It absorbs and draws lessons from some of the methods of pretrial procedure under the mode of litigant doctrine, which makes the pretrial procedure more reasonable and complete, but it is still a new thing in the criminal trial practice of our country. The related theoretical research is insufficient, plus the imperfect legislation and the lack of supporting system make the procedure lack of maneuverability, fail to fully realize the establishment of a fair and efficient criminal procedure trial mechanism to ensure the rights of the parties. Promote procedural justice and realize the due value function of optimizing allocation of limited litigation resources. This paper adopts the methods of comparative study and empirical research to compare and analyze the pretrial preparation procedures in Britain, the United States and France, based on the relevant judicial interpretations of the New Criminal procedure Law and the Supreme people's Court and the Supreme people's Procuratorate. Based on the judicial practice of the criminal pretrial preparation procedure in many places in China, this paper focuses on the concrete content, value function and perfect path of the procedure. The main body of this paper is divided into four parts:. The first part studies the meaning, characteristics and value function of the criminal pretrial procedure, which is different from the criminal pretrial procedure. The latter is based on the concept of trial centrism. This paper focuses on the narrow sense of pretrial preparation procedure, which is conducive to the fair trial of criminal cases, the improvement of trial efficiency, the protection of litigants' rights, and the effective diversion of cases in order to save judicial resources. In the second part, the author analyzes the current situation of the criminal court preparation procedure in China. It combs the relevant provisions of the legislation, and concludes the main contents of the current criminal court preparation procedure, and analyzes the problems and their causes in the current judicial practice. The third part is about the overseas investigation and research. Through the comparative analysis of the Anglo-American law system party doctrine mode, the civil law system authority doctrine model, the Japanese mixed doctrine pattern, the pre-trial preparation procedure, Draw lessons from it. The basic purpose of the criminal pretrial preparation procedures in various countries is to ensure the centralized and continuous trial in order to realize the fairness and efficiency of the trial; in the specific preparatory matters, it includes the knowledge of the evidence, the preservation and retrieval of the evidence, Eliminate illegal evidence, collate evidence and dispute, defendant defense and case diversion. In the 4th part, the author puts forward the realistic and expectant goal of how to perfect the criminal pretrial preparation procedure in China, which should adhere to the principle of fairness and efficiency, effectively link up the principle of the main trial procedure, and improve the criminal pre-court preparation procedure. The principle of procedural participation. To perfect the present system of pretrial conference in our country is the realistic goal, to its scope of application, to the main body of participation, In order to construct the criminal pretrial preparation procedure in accordance with the national conditions of our country, and to perfect the procedure diversion mechanism and other preparatory work of the pretrial preparatory procedure, It is also suggested that the functions of the court should be expanded to include the establishment of a "pretrial preparation working group" to separate the pre-trial preparation procedure from the presiding officer of the formal trial procedure.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】