海峡两岸刑事冤案预防机制比较研究

发布时间：2018-06-01 05:53

本文选题：刑事冤案 + 预防机制　；参考：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：近几年来频频发生的刑事冤案严重地拷问着我国的司法公正与法律公信力，冤案的发生不仅极大地损害了无辜的人的合法权益，而且使真正的罪犯继续危害社会稳定。鉴于冤案造成的恶劣影响，我国大陆地区从司法理念、证据制度、辩护制度和侦查程序等方面对刑事冤案的预防机制进行了完善。但是，还存在一定的问题：未明确规定直接言词原则，导致证人、鉴定人出庭率低，审判委员会讨论决定案件情况多发；法官独立性未保障，政法委协调办案、舆论媒体影响办案导致冤案的发生；未确立侦查讯问时的律师在场权，侦查阶段的刑讯逼供等违法取证行为得不到有效监督制约；侦讯程序不完善，鉴定制度还存在各种问题，侦查机关的告知义务出现“两多两少”的情况。这些问题的存在使刑事冤案得不到很好地预防，频频出现影响司法公正。台湾地区通过司法改革建立了比较完善的刑事冤案预防机制，具体包括：第一，司法理念的完善，强化了人权保障的理念，明确了无罪推定原则；第二，证据制度的修订，增加了传闻证据规则、修订了非法证据排除规则、明确了自由心证原则；第三，侦讯制度的完善，明确讯问人员要践行告知义务，完善了讯问笔录的制作，增加了全程录音录影的规定，完善了鉴定制度；第四，辩护制度的完善，对讯问时的律师在场权予以规定；第五，审判制度的完善，构建了当事人主义的庭审模式并实现法官的独立性，确保证人出庭作证。台湾地区与大陆地区同宗同源，文化背景、社会传统等方面有很多相似之处，因此台湾地区的冤案预防机制相较于英美等国家更有借鉴性。但是目前大陆地区对台湾刑事冤案预防机制的研究甚少。经过比较发现，，海峡两岸在刑事冤案预防机制的构建上存在一定的相同之处和不同之处，相同之处表现在：注重司法理念的完善，完善辩护、侦查、证据等具体制度，冤案的发生促使司法改革、构建预防机制；不同之处表现在：推动冤案预防机制构建的主体不同，审判机制不同。在完善大陆地区的刑事冤案预防机制时我们应吸取台湾地区的经验，在进行法律移植时应结合国情，注重实质、避免形式主义，注重配套措施、制度的完善。具体从明确规定直接言词原则、赋予律师侦查讯问时的在场权、完善侦讯制度、完善证据规则、保障法官独立审判和建立判决理由公开制度等方面对大陆地区刑事冤案预防机制进行完善。
[Abstract]:The criminal injustice cases occurring frequently in recent years seriously torture the judicial justice and legal credibility of our country. The occurrence of the injustice not only greatly damages the legitimate rights and interests of the innocent people, but also makes the real criminals continue to harm the social stability. In view of the bad effects caused by the injustice, China's mainland region from the judicial concept, evidence system, plea. The prevention mechanism of the criminal injustice is perfected. However, there are still some problems. However, there are still some problems: the direct speech principle is not clearly stipulated, which leads to the low rate of witnesses, the appraisers' appearing in court, the decision of the judicial committee to decide the case, the independence of the judges, the coordination of the case by the political and Law Commission and the influence of public opinion media. The case leads to the occurrence of the case of injustice; the right of the lawyer's presence in the investigation and interrogation, and the act of extorting the confession by torture in the investigation stage can not be effectively supervised and restricted; the investigation procedure is not perfect, the identification system has various problems, and the informing obligation of the investigation organs is "two or two less". The existence of these problems makes the criminal injustice The case is not well prevented, and frequently affects judicial justice.
Taiwan region has established a relatively perfect prevention mechanism for criminal injustice through judicial reform, including: first, the perfection of the judicial idea, strengthening the concept of human rights protection, and clarified the principle of presumption of innocence. Second, the revision of the evidence system has added the rules of hearsay evidence, revised the exclusionary rule of illegal evidence, and clarified the original freedom of evidence. Third, the perfection of the interrogation system, clear interrogation personnel should practice the obligation of informing, perfect the production of interrogation record, increase the whole process recording and recording, improve the system of identification; fourth, the perfection of the defense system, the right of the lawyer's presence in the interrogation; fifth, the perfection of the trial system, and the construction of the litigant The mode of trial and the independence of judges to ensure that witnesses testify in court.
There are many similarities in the same origin, cultural background and social tradition in the Taiwan area and the mainland. Therefore, the prevention mechanism of the case of injustice in Taiwan is more useful than the British and American countries. However, there are few studies on the prevention mechanism of the criminal cases in Taiwan in the mainland. There are some similarities and differences in the construction of anti mechanism, and the similarities are shown in the following aspects: paying attention to the perfection of judicial idea, perfecting the concrete system of defense, investigation, evidence and so on. The occurrence of the injustice causes the judicial reform and the construction of the prevention mechanism; the difference shows that the main body of the construction of the prevention mechanism of the injustice is different and the trial mechanism is not. In order to improve the prevention mechanism of criminal injustice in the mainland, we should absorb the experience of the Taiwan region. In the case of legal transplantation, we should combine the actual conditions, pay attention to the essence, avoid formalism, pay attention to the supporting measures and improve the system. We should improve the rules of evidence, safeguard the independent trial of judges and establish the open system of reasons for judgments, so as to perfect the prevention mechanism of criminal cases in mainland China.
【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

【参考文献】