论中日比较研究视角下我国精神病强制医疗程序的完善

发布时间：2018-10-26 19:19

【摘要】：2013年10月10日是第十九个世界精神卫生日。社会心理健康、精神疾病已经成为当前社会亟需解决的问题,在精神障碍者自杀率和他害率不断攀升的形势下,做一壁上观显然不是解决问题的办法,在精神卫生问题短时间内无法解决的情形下,如何改善现状,缓解精神障碍者实施他害行为和其人身危险性已经成为我们的当务之急。纵观国内外强制医疗制度的长期发展过程,其也经历了从无到有,在摸索中前进的过程。而在新刑事诉讼法颁布之前,我国对精神障碍者的强制医疗的法律规定和司法实践都具有浓厚的“行政化”色彩,性质界定不明、适用对象模糊、提起和决定主体不清以及正当程序的缺失等多方面的问题,导致强制医疗措施在实际运行时严重缺乏保障。2012年3月份,全国人大通过了刑事诉讼法修正案,将强制医疗程序以特别程序的形式纳入其中,是我国刑事立法中的一次里程碑式的创举。本文以中日两国精神病强制医疗制度的比较研究为着眼点,对日本的立法和实践的进行了借鉴和分析,并详细比较了两国精神病强制医疗程序,包括了强制医疗程序的启动——精神医学鉴定和司法判定程序、运行——裁判、执行以及救济的整个诉讼程序。最后根据强制医疗程序的根本性质、基本原则和基础理论,探讨我国的强制医疗程序应当完善之处。第一,笔者认为当前强制医疗程序的适用对象范围过窄,使得一些具有社会危害性的精神障碍者成为漏网之鱼,限制了强制医疗程序发挥应有的社会防卫功能,因此,应当将限制刑事责任能力的精神障碍者和无受审能力的精神障碍者纳入到强制医疗程序的适用对象范围之内。第二,针对当前法官在审理强制医疗程序案件时,对被申请强制医疗人是否“有继续危害社会可能”的认定标准问题。笔者认为,这个问题应当结合具体案件情况具体分析裁判。而判定标准主要有以下三类：一是被申请人的精神病的疾病类型；二是被申请人实施危害行为的起因、经过；三是被申请人有无接受治疗的条件。第三,对精神障碍者接受强制医疗后的重返社会保障机制提出建设性意见。主要包括对精神障碍者痊愈后的后续心理矫正和回归社会正常生活保障机制两个方面。第四,针对法官如何对鉴定结论作出客观、正确判定提出了意见,首先,将鉴定人定位为法官审理案件的辅助人,弥补某些法官在专业领域的知事欠缺；其次,赋予当时人启动精神病鉴定的权利,以保障当事人的合法权利,防止公权力滥用。本文通过理论——对比——完善的认识和论述过程,通过借鉴和对比日本强制医疗程序的设置理论和实践,以及对我国现实国情的分析,希望能从理论和实践两个方面完善我国的精神病强制医疗程序。
[Abstract]:October 10, 2013 is the nineteenth World Mental Health Day. Social mental health and mental illness have become a problem that needs to be solved in the current society. Under the situation that the suicide rate and other harm rate of mentally handicapped people are constantly rising, it is obviously not the solution to solve the problem by taking a wall view. Under the situation that the mental health problem can not be solved in a short time, how to improve the present situation and alleviate the harm behavior and personal danger of the mentally handicapped has become our urgent task. Throughout the long-term development process of compulsory medical system at home and abroad, it has also experienced the process of moving forward from scratch to existence. Before the promulgation of the new Code of Criminal procedure, the legal provisions and judicial practice of compulsory medical treatment for mentally handicapped people in our country have a strong "administrative" color, the nature of the definition is unclear, the object of application is vague. The introduction and determination of unclear subjects and the lack of due process have led to a serious lack of safeguards for compulsory medical measures in practice. In March 2012, the National people's Congress adopted an amendment to the Criminal procedure Law. It is a milestone in Chinese criminal legislation to include compulsory medical procedure in the form of special procedure. Based on the comparative study of compulsory psychiatric care system between China and Japan, this paper makes a reference and analysis of the legislation and practice of Japan, and makes a detailed comparison of the compulsory psychiatric medical procedures between the two countries. It includes the initiation of compulsory medical procedure-the procedure of psychiatric identification and judicial judgment, the whole procedure of running-adjudication, execution and relief. Finally, according to the basic nature, basic principle and basic theory of compulsory medical procedure, this paper probes into the perfection of compulsory medical procedure in our country. First, the author thinks that the scope of application of the current compulsory medical procedure is too narrow, which makes some mentally handicapped people with social harmfulness become the fish of the net, which limits the compulsory medical procedure to play its due social defense function. Persons with mental disorders who limit their ability to be criminally responsible and those who have no capacity to stand trial should be included in the scope of application of compulsory medical procedures. Second, to judge in the trial of compulsory medical procedure cases, the application for compulsory medical treatment whether "continue to harm the society may" determine the standard. The author believes that this problem should be combined with the specific case specific analysis of the referee. The criteria are as follows: the first is the disease type of mental illness of the respondent; the second is the cause of the harmful behavior of the respondent; the third is whether the defendant has the condition of receiving treatment. Third, to provide constructive advice on the reintegration mechanism after compulsory medical treatment. It mainly includes two aspects: psychological correction after recovery and social return to normal life mechanism. Fourth, in view of how the judge makes the objective judgment to the appraisal conclusion, has put forward the opinion, first, the expert judge will be positioned as the judge hearing the case auxiliary person, makes up some judges in the specialized domain governor insufficiency; Secondly, people were given the right to initiate psychiatric examination in order to protect the legal rights of the parties and prevent abuse of public power. This article through the theory-contrast-perfect understanding and the elaboration process, through uses for reference and contrasts the Japanese compulsory medical procedure establishment theory and the practice, as well as to our country reality situation analysis, The author hopes to perfect the compulsory medical procedure of mental illness in our country from two aspects: theory and practice.
【学位授予单位】：浙江工业大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】