N省非法口供排除规则运行情况调查报告

发布时间：2019-01-14 13:42

【摘要】：本论文共有引言和四部分组成。引言部分对非法口供的概念以及目前我国法律对非法口供排除规则的内涵进行了界定。以法律规定为视角,突出非法口供排除规则在当今司法制度中重要性的变化过程。并介绍本文调研的对象、方法。第一部分首先通过问卷调查的方式收集当下N省刑事审判中非法口供排除规则的运用情况,问卷的内容覆盖6个问题,从启动、调查、认定三个方面展现非法口供排除规则的具体实施状况;其次,运用真实的案例来反映非法口供排除规则在具体案件中的个中遭遇;第三,笔者对相关法律人士进行了访谈,人员设置包括法官、检察官和律师。收集的信息集中反映办案过程中对非法口供案件的处理、遇到的问题以及完善建议等。最后,简要总结三种途径收集信息反映的共同点和不同点。这一章仅做客观的现状描述,未做价值评价。第二部分以N省非法口供排除规则实际运作为基础,摆出非法口供排除规则“四不”的现实问题,即:非法口供排除规则不管用、不会用、不愿用、不敢用。正是这些问题的存在,使得非法口供排除规则的落实情况不容乐观,离我国刑事诉讼法的立法精神、要求很远。第三部分从案件的侦查、公诉、审判环节以及辩方四方面层层检讨,深入查找非法口供排除规则现实问题的成因。多视角、全方位的扫描各个主体如何操实践该规则,进而分析该规则呈现问题的原因。第一,侦查环节存在侦查条件差、侦查意识不强等问题,急于破案、立功心切,产生非法口供的可能性最大;第二,检察机关监督软使得非法口供顺利流向审判环节直至成为定案依据;第三,审判作为权利救济的最后一关,在非法口供排除规则的适用中起着至关重要的作用,但在现实中,庭审“走过场”致使非法口供的审查流于形式,非法口供得不到理应的排除;第四,刑事辩护方出现的被告人文化程度不高、担心加重罪责,以及律师辩护人介入案件迟,发挥职能较少等主客观原因也使得非法口供难以得到排除。种种因素的结合导致非法口供排除规则面临难以真正适用的困境。第四部分完善非法证据排除规则的建议。要做到确立程序性的诉权制约机制,提升辩护方的举证能力来应对“不管用”;要转变“口供帝王”观念,强化程序意识来应对“不会用”;建议将非法口供的审理纳入考核机制,并结合检察监督规则使用来共同应对“不愿用”;以法院为中心,推行法官负责制应对“不敢用”。针对四个问题,多措并举,力促非法口供排除规则在N省刑事司法中发挥应有的作用。
[Abstract]:This paper has an introduction and four parts. The introduction defines the concept of illegal confession and the connotation of the exclusion rule of illegal confession in Chinese law. From the perspective of legal regulations, this paper highlights the changing process of the importance of the rule of exclusion of illegal confessions in today's judicial system. The object and method of this paper are introduced. The first part collects the application of illegal confession exclusion rules in criminal trial in N province by means of questionnaire survey. The contents of the questionnaire cover 6 questions, starting from the start and investigating. To identify three aspects to show the specific implementation of illegal confession exclusion rules; Secondly, the use of real cases to reflect illegal confession exclusion rules in specific cases encountered; third, the author conducted interviews with relevant legal personnel, including judges, prosecutors and lawyers. The collected information reflects the handling of illegal confessions in the course of handling cases, problems encountered and suggestions for improvement. Finally, the common points and differences of the three ways to collect information are summarized briefly. This chapter is only an objective description of the status quo, not value evaluation. The second part is based on the actual operation of the exclusion rule of illegal confession in N province, and puts forward the practical problem of "four noes" in the rule of exclusion of illegal confession, that is, the rule of exclusion of illegal confession does not work, will not be used, does not want to use, and does not dare to use it. It is the existence of these problems that makes the implementation of illegal confession exclusion rules not optimistic and far from the legislative spirit of our criminal procedure law. In the third part, four aspects of investigation, public prosecution, trial and defense are reviewed to find out the causes of the practical problems of illegal confession exclusion rules. From many angles of view, every subject is scanned how to practice the rule, and then analyzes the reason why the rule presents problems. First, the investigation link exists the investigation condition is bad, the investigation consciousness is not strong and so on question, anxious to solve the case, does the meritorious work keenly, produces the illegal confession possibility most; Second, the supervision of the procuratorial organ makes the illegal confession flow smoothly to the trial link until it becomes the basis of the final case. Third, trial, as the last pass of right relief, plays a vital role in the application of the rule of exclusion of illegal confessions, but in reality, the examination of illegal confessions becomes a mere formality. Illegal confessions cannot be excluded as they ought to be; Fourth, the criminal defense of the defendant's education level is not high, worried about aggravated guilt, and lawyers and defenders involved in the case late, play a less subjective and objective reasons, such as illegal confessions are difficult to exclude. The combination of various factors leads to the difficulty of applying illegal confession exclusion rules. The fourth part is the suggestion of perfecting the exclusion rules of illegal evidence. It is necessary to establish procedural restriction mechanism of procedural right of action, improve the ability of proof of defense to deal with "not effective", change the concept of "confession emperor", and strengthen the sense of procedure to deal with "no use". It is suggested that the trial of illegal confessions should be brought into the examination mechanism and combined with the rules of procuratorial supervision to jointly deal with "unwilling to use", and to implement the system of judge responsibility as the center of the court to deal with "not using". Aiming at the four problems, the author tries to urge the rule of illegal confession exclusion to play its due role in the criminal justice of N province.
【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】