犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权制度研究

发布时间：2018-03-27 11:36

本文选题：犯罪嫌疑人　切入点：证据知悉权　出处：《西南财经大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权就是指犯罪嫌疑人有权获得与自己案件相关的证据信息。证据知悉权是犯罪嫌疑人一项重要的权利,是其有效行使辩护权的前提和基础。而我国目前仍然没有明确犯罪嫌疑人有证据知悉权。导致在司法实践中,大多数犯罪嫌疑人将来不能有效维护自身合法权益。本文采用了理论联系实际和比较的方式进行研究。一方面对西方国家就犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权进行考察,另一方面对我国立法现状和司法现状进行考察,比较得出我国与西方国家的差距以及我国又不能照搬西方模式的原因,希望能够对我国完善犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的立法有意义。本文正文分为五个部分。第一章描述了犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的理论基础。以1963年美国布雷迪起诉马里兰谋杀案件引发出英美国家对犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的保障方式、对我国犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权问题的思考以及犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的理论基础、性质和与相关概念的区别。第二章是对犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的中外比较分析。结合我国犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的立法现状和司法实践现状与域外有关犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的规定进行比较分析。第三章是对我国犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的立法缺陷及成因进行分析。本章包括两个方面。一是,我国犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的立法缺陷,分别从现阶段犯罪嫌疑人获得证据方式的缺陷、用作证据的鉴定意见的告知存在的缺陷和辩护律师向犯罪嫌疑人核实有关证据存在的缺陷进行分析。二是,立法缺陷的原因。分别从向犯罪嫌疑人展示证据存在隐患、律师的职业道德问题以及阅卷争议的裁决权掌握在控方手里存在的问题进行分析。第四章我国现阶段不能适用证据开示制度的原因及犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的可行性。本章通过对我国证据制度、法官中立性和诉讼模式的分析得出现阶段不能建立证据开示制度的结论以及目前较为适合赋予建立犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的原因。第五章对我国犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的完善建议。分别从有、无辩护律师的犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的保障、鉴定意见的告知、对证人的保护制度以及对侵犯犯罪嫌疑人证据知悉权的救济方面提出建议。
[Abstract]:The right to know the evidence of a criminal suspect means that the suspect has the right to obtain evidence information related to his case. The right to know the evidence is an important right of the suspect. It is the premise and foundation of its effective exercise of the right to defense. However, at present, our country still has no clear criminal suspects have the right to know the evidence. As a result, in the judicial practice, most suspects can not effectively safeguard their legitimate rights and interests in the future. On the one hand, this paper studies the right of criminal suspects to know evidence in western countries, on the other hand, it investigates the current legislative and judicial situation of our country. By comparing the gap between China and western countries and the reason why our country can not copy the western model, it is hoped that it will be meaningful to improve the legislation of criminal suspects' right of knowing evidence. The text of this paper is divided into five parts. The first chapter describes the theoretical basis of suspect's right to know evidence. In 1963, American Brady sued Maryland murder case, which caused the British and American countries to guarantee the suspect's right to know evidence. This paper discusses the problem of suspect's right to know evidence in our country, and the theoretical basis, nature and difference with related concepts of the right of criminal suspect's right to know evidence. The second chapter is a comparative analysis of the criminal suspects' right to know evidence, combining the legislative status and judicial practice of the right of criminal suspects to know evidence, and the provisions of the right of criminal suspects to know evidence outside the country. The third chapter is to analyze the legislative defects and causes of the criminal suspects' right to know evidence. This chapter includes two aspects. First, the legislative defects of the right of criminal suspects to know the evidence. The defects in the way the criminal suspect obtains evidence at this stage, the defects existing in the notification of the appraisal opinions used as evidence and the defects of the defense counsel verifying the evidence to the criminal suspect are analyzed respectively. Second, The reasons of the legislative defects are analyzed from showing the hidden dangers of the evidence to the criminal suspects, the professional ethics of the lawyers and the power to judge the disputes in the hands of the prosecution. Chapter IV: the reasons why the system of discovery of evidence cannot be applied in our country at this stage and the feasibility of the right to know evidence of criminal suspects. The analysis of the neutrality of the judge and the mode of litigation draws the conclusion that the system of discovery of evidence cannot be established at the present stage and the reasons why it is more suitable to grant the right to know the evidence of the criminal suspect at present. The fifth chapter is about the perfection of the right to know the evidence of the suspect in our country. From the protection of the right to know the evidence of the suspect with and without defense counsel, and the notification of the appraisal opinion, Suggestions on witness protection system and remedies for violation of suspect's right to know evidence are put forward.
【学位授予单位】：西南财经大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】