特别重大贿赂案件侦查阶段律师会见权实证研究

发布时间：2018-04-21 03:02

本文选题：特别重大贿赂案件 + 侦查阶段　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：刑事诉讼法在学界历来具有小宪法之称,作为衡量一个国家人权状况的重要参照之一,在刑事诉讼法中对于人权的保障又以对犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的人权保障为主要内容,律师会见权是刑事诉讼法赋予律师会见在押的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的一项重要权利。侦查阶段的会见能够及时为在押犯罪嫌疑人提供法律咨询和帮助、监督纠正违法侦查手段、排除非法证据,从而对维护犯罪嫌疑人合法权益具有重要意义。但司法实践表明,侦查阶段的律师会见权又极容易受到侵犯,搞清楚律师会见难现象背后的深层次原因,有针对性地提出改进措施,平衡各方合理关切,对于规范律师会见制度,实现控辩双方良性互动,依法指控犯罪,更好地保障犯罪嫌疑人合法权益、推动刑事辩护制度发展进步具有重要的现实意义。本论文除引言和结语外共分为四个部分,主要内容如下:第一部分,介绍我国法律对于律师会见的相关规定。我国法律对于律师会见经历了一个从严限制到逐步放宽的过程,目前,仅在侦查阶段中对危害国家安全犯罪、恐怖活动犯罪和特别重大贿赂犯罪案件实行许可会见制度,就职务犯罪侦查阶段而言特别重大贿赂犯罪主要是涉案金额50万元以上、有重大社会影响、涉及国家重大利益,对会见权的救济仅依靠检察机关内部自行审查,作出是否允许会见的决定。第二部分,梳理侦查阶段律师会见的运行状况。当前特别重大贿赂案件在贿赂案件中占有一定比例,导致律师需要申请会见的案件基数较大,但是侦查阶段律师申请会见得到许可的比例又比较低,个别侦查部门对律师的会见申请答复不及时,利用法律漏洞拖延律师会见,甚至突破案件规定限制律师会见,检察机关内部对于保障律师会见权该由哪个部门负责,权责不清,对于律师会见申诉审查简单化,难以有效保障律师会见权。第三部分,分析律师会见难背后的深层次原因。律师会见难主要有两个方面的原因,就检察机关而言存在执法观念转变不及时、侦查模式转型不及时、执法办案考评体系不合理等原因,检察机关在部门利益的驱使下,难免对会见进行不当阻碍。就检察机关以外的原因而言,主要是相关法律规范失之于宽、律师深度介入对传统侦查模式的影响、纪检监察机关的不当干预等原因,上述原因相互影响、相互交织,导致了律师会见难问题的产生。第四部分,提出保障律师会见权的意见建议。要想更好地保障律师会见权,检察机关必须及时转变执法观念、推动侦查模式转型发展,提高侦查水平和能力,更好地应对律师深入介入侦查带来的影响。同时,还应当落实检察官办案主体责任、扩展对侦查活动的监督渠道,理顺检察机关与纪检监察机关的职能分工,公检法司等部门加强协调,明确限制会见案件范围,防止人为随意解读法律规定。
[Abstract]:The criminal procedure law has always been known as the minor constitution in the academic world. As one of the important references to measure the human rights situation of a country, the protection of human rights in the criminal procedure law mainly includes the human rights protection of the criminal suspect and the defendant. Lawyer's right of meeting is an important right for lawyers to meet suspects and defendants in custody under the Criminal procedure Law. The meeting at the investigation stage can provide legal advice and help for the suspects in custody, supervise and correct the illegal investigation techniques, and exclude illegal evidence, which is of great significance to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of the criminal suspects. However, the judicial practice shows that the lawyer's right to meet in the investigation stage is very easy to be infringed upon, so as to find out the deep-seated reasons behind the phenomenon of the lawyer's meeting difficulty, and to put forward some improvement measures to balance the reasonable concerns of all parties. It has important practical significance for standardizing lawyer meeting system, realizing benign interaction between prosecution and defense, accusing crime according to law, better protecting the legitimate rights and interests of criminal suspects, and promoting the development and progress of criminal defense system. This thesis is divided into four parts in addition to introduction and conclusion. The main contents are as follows: the first part introduces the relevant provisions of the law of our country for lawyers. The law of our country has experienced a process of strict restriction to gradual relaxation of lawyers' interviews. At present, only in the investigation stage are the permission and interview systems for crimes against national security, crimes of terrorist activities and especially serious bribery crimes. As far as the investigation stage of job-related crimes is concerned, the major crimes of bribery are mainly the amount of more than 500000 yuan involved, which has a significant social impact and involves the major interests of the state. The relief for the right of meeting only depends on the internal examination of the procuratorial organs by themselves. Make a decision whether or not to allow the meeting. The second part, combs the investigation stage lawyer to meet the movement condition. At present, especially important bribery cases occupy a certain proportion in bribery cases, leading to a large number of cases in which lawyers need to apply for interviews, but the proportion of lawyers applying for permission to meet in the investigation stage is also relatively low. Individual investigation departments did not respond promptly to lawyers' requests for interviews, took advantage of legal loopholes to delay lawyers' meetings, or even broke through the provisions of cases to restrict lawyers' meetings. Within the procuratorial organs, it was unclear which department should be responsible for ensuring lawyers' right to meet, and their powers and responsibilities were unclear. The examination of lawyer's meeting complaint is simplistic, so it is difficult to protect the lawyer's right of meeting effectively. The third part analyzes the deep reasons behind the difficulty of meeting lawyers. There are two main reasons for the difficulty in meeting lawyers. As far as procuratorial organs are concerned, the change in law enforcement concept is not timely, the transformation of investigation mode is not timely, the system of examination and evaluation of law enforcement cases is unreasonable, and so on. The procuratorial organs are driven by the interests of the departments. It is inevitable that the meeting will be improperly obstructed. As far as reasons other than procuratorial organs are concerned, they are mainly due to the lack of leniency of relevant legal norms, the influence of lawyers' deep involvement on the traditional investigation mode, the improper intervention of discipline inspection and supervision organs, and so on. The above reasons are intertwined with each other. This led to the difficulty of meeting lawyers. The fourth part, puts forward the suggestion of protecting lawyer's right of meeting. In order to better protect lawyers' right to meet with each other, procuratorial organs must change the concept of law enforcement in time, promote the transformation and development of investigation mode, improve the level and ability of investigation, and better deal with the influence of lawyers' deep involvement in investigation. At the same time, it is also necessary to implement the principal responsibility of procurators in handling cases, expand the channels of supervision over investigation activities, straighten out the division of functions between procuratorial organs and discipline inspection and supervision organs, strengthen coordination between public procuratorates and law departments, and clearly limit the scope of meeting cases. Prevent arbitrary interpretation of legal provisions.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】