近亲属拒证权问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-03 04:33

本文选题：亲属拒证权　切入点：亲亲相隐　出处：《山东大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：亲属间的拒证权在我国法律传统中由来已久,我们通常称之为“亲亲相隐”。从先秦到民国,亲亲相隐制度伴随着我国传统法律的整个进程。自秦律最早将“亲亲相隐”的思想应用于法律,到西汉开始以法令的形式确立“亲亲相隐制度”,再到《唐律疏议》中规定的“同居相为隐”制度,后世的宋、元、明、清历代都沿袭了这一制度,直至民国时期仍然继受“亲亲相隐”这一法律原则,而且将近亲属拒证规定为一种权利。“亲亲相隐制度”在古代能够长期存在的主要原因就是能够巩固皇权的统治,在封建社会实行家国一体的宗法制社会结构下,保护家庭的稳定就是保护了社会的稳定,同时在古代刑民不分的律法传统下,在一定程度上能够缓解司法专横与株连,能够维护家庭伦理和血缘亲情。笔者比较了英美法系国家,如英国和美国,大陆法系国家,如德国、法国和日本法律制度中关于亲属拒证权的规定,与我国现行法律近亲属拒证权的缺失形成鲜明的对比。我国缺少近亲属拒证权制度的原因主要有五个方面：一是实体正义与程序正当之间的价值失衡；二是取证方式与证明标准之间的矛盾冲突；三是过于强调法的阶级性属性；四是长期以来司法工具主义的影响；五是发现案件事实与强迫亲属作证的矛盾在我国并不突出。缺少近亲属拒证权制度明显违背了公众意愿,侵犯了个人自由,不利于基本人权的保护和法律权威的树立。在司法实践中破坏了家庭稳定,降低了证据质量,不利于程序法治的进程与和谐社会的构建。在我国法治化进程中有必要重塑近亲属拒证权制度,当然真正想要完善该制度还任重而道远。本文试从近亲属拒证权的行使主体、行使范围和行使方式三个方面建构我国近亲属拒证权制度的框架,并应着重加强对未成年近亲属的保护,这对于完善我国的刑事诉讼法律制度和人权的保护意义重大。近亲属拒证权在我国行使的主体应当与现行刑事诉讼法相适应,即近亲属的范围是犯罪嫌疑人或被告人的配偶、父母、子女、同胞兄弟姐妹,该四种主体之间如果是共同犯罪或者对于发生侵犯国家利益、社会秩序的犯罪、贪污渎职类犯罪、针对近亲属的杀害和性犯罪等不能行使近亲属拒证权。为了保障近亲属拒证权的行使本文还从申请程序、救济程序和放弃程序三个方面进行了制度设计。笔者认为近亲属行使拒证权就是被动的不提供任何证据的状态,包括不提供物证、书证、视听资料等能够证明犯罪嫌疑人犯罪的证据,如果近亲属积极主动的帮助犯罪嫌疑人毁灭、伪造证据,则不影响帮助毁灭、伪造证据罪或者窝藏、包庇罪的成立。
[Abstract]:The right of refusing proof between relatives has a long history in the legal tradition of our country.From the pre-Qin Dynasty to the Republic of China, the system of kin-relative concealment was accompanied by the whole process of Chinese traditional law.From the first application of the thought of "close relatives to each other" to the law, to the establishment of the system of "close relatives and relatives hiding each other" in the form of decrees in the Western Han Dynasty, to the system of "cohabitation as hidden" as stipulated in "Tang Ru-Shu", the Song, Yuan and Ming dynasties of later generations.The Qing Dynasty inherited this system, until the period of the Republic of China, it was still accepted the legal principle of "close relatives hide each other", and nearly relatives refused the certificate as a kind of right.In ancient times, the main reason for the existence of the "close-in-kin system" was to consolidate the rule of imperial power. Under the patriarchal social structure of the feudal society, the protection of the stability of the family was the protection of the stability of the society.At the same time, in the ancient law tradition, it can alleviate judicial arbitrariness and kinship to a certain extent, and can maintain family ethics and kinship.The author compares the provisions of the legal system of the common law system, such as the United Kingdom and the United States, and the continental law system, such as Germany, France and Japan, on the right of refusal of a relative's license, which is in sharp contrast to the lack of the right of refusal of a certificate by a close relative in the current law of our country.There are five main reasons for the lack of the system of the right of refusal of proof by close relatives in our country: first, the value imbalance between substantive justice and procedural justice; second, the conflict between the method of obtaining evidence and the standard of proof; third, too much emphasis on the class attribute of law;The fourth is the influence of judicial instrumentalism for a long time, and the fifth is that the contradiction between finding the facts of the case and forcing relatives to testify is not prominent in our country.The lack of close relatives' right to refuse proof obviously violates the public will, infringes on individual freedom, and is not conducive to the protection of basic human rights and the establishment of legal authority.In judicial practice, it destroys family stability, reduces the quality of evidence, and is not conducive to the process of procedural rule of law and the construction of a harmonious society.It is necessary to remould the system of the right of refusal of certificate by close relatives in the process of ruling by law in our country. Of course, there is still a long way to go in order to perfect the system.In this paper, the author tries to construct the framework of the system of the right of refusal of license of near relatives in our country from three aspects: the exercise subject, the scope and the mode of exercise of the right of refusal of certificate, and the emphasis should be placed on strengthening the protection of the near relatives of minors.This is of great significance to improve the legal system of criminal procedure and the protection of human rights.The subject of the exercise of the right of refusal of proof by close relatives in our country should be adapted to the current criminal procedure law, that is, the scope of close relatives is the spouse, parents, children, siblings of the suspect or defendant,If the four subjects commit a joint crime or the crime of violating national interests, social order, embezzlement and dereliction of duty, the killing and sexual crimes of the near relatives cannot exercise the right of refusing to testify by the near relatives.In order to guarantee the exercise of the right of refusal of certificate by close relatives, this paper also designs the system from three aspects: application procedure, relief procedure and renunciation procedure.The author believes that the exercise of the right of refusal by close relatives is a passive state of not providing any evidence, including material evidence, documentary evidence, audio-visual materials, and so on, which can prove the crime of a criminal suspect.If close relatives take the initiative to help criminal suspects destroy and forge evidence, it will not affect the establishment of the crime of helping to destroy, falsifying evidence or harbouring or harbouring it.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】