刑事诉讼中的选择性起诉问题研究

发布时间：2018-05-15 09:59

本文选题：选择性起诉 + 歧视性效果　；参考：《苏州大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：检察机关违反宪法的“平等保护”原则，基于武断、任意的分类，在同一类群案件中不公平地选择部分犯罪嫌疑人的行为就是“选择性起诉”。选择性起诉是检察机关滥用公诉裁量权的表现，违背了公诉是基于公共利益的本质要求。它在微观上会影响个案的公正，，在宏观上则会严重影响整个法治社会的形成与发展，因此它的危害不容忽视。而且选择性起诉违反了宪法关于平等保护的权利，侵犯了公民的合法权利,它并不应当产生公诉效力。对于选择性起诉，以美国、日本为代表的外国建立了选择性起诉的救济制度。美国的选择性起诉辩护制度应该是发展得最为完善的，通过YickWo v.Hopkins案等一系列标志性案例确立起选择性起诉辩护制度后，又确立了既要证明歧视性效果也要证明歧视性意图的双重证明标准和严格的证据开示标准。日本的“公诉权滥用论”为选择性起诉辩护提供了理论支持，也为我国提供了有益的经验。通过比较研究，笔者认为不管哪个法系的国家，应对选择性起诉，都可以采用司法手段进行救济。由于我国的公诉审查制度本身的漏洞和不足等原因，我国有必要建立选择性起诉救济制度，以抑制这种滥用公诉权的行为。而我国构建选择性起诉救济制度，应主要通过完善公诉审查程序、建立公诉审查庭、赋予被告人辩护权、举证责任倒置等制度设置来完成。
[Abstract]:The procuratorial organ violates the principle of "equal protection" of the constitution, based on arbitrary and arbitrary classification, the act of unfairly selecting some suspects in the same kind of cases is "selective prosecution". Selective prosecution is the manifestation of procuratorial organ abusing the discretion of public prosecution, which violates the essential requirement of public interest. It will affect the justice of the case at the micro level, and the formation and development of the whole society under the rule of law on the macro level, so its harm can not be ignored. Moreover, selective prosecution violates the constitutional right of equal protection and infringes the legal rights of citizens. For selective prosecution, foreign countries represented by the United States and Japan have established the relief system of selective prosecution. The selective prosecution defense system in the United States should be the most perfect. After the establishment of the selective prosecution defense system through a series of iconic cases such as the YickWo v.Hopkins case, It also establishes the double proof standard and the strict evidence discovery standard that both the discriminatory effect and the discriminatory intention should be proved. The theory of abuse of Public Prosecution in Japan not only provides theoretical support for selective prosecution, but also provides beneficial experience for our country. Through comparative study, the author thinks that no matter which legal system country, should choose the prosecution, can use the judicial means to carry on the relief. Due to the loopholes and deficiencies of the public prosecution review system in our country, it is necessary to establish the selective prosecution remedy system in order to restrain the abuse of the public prosecution right. In order to construct the selective prosecution relief system in our country, it should be completed mainly by perfecting the public prosecution review procedure, establishing the public prosecution review court, endowing the defendant with the right to defend, and putting the burden of proof upside down.
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】