我国案卷移送制度功能的重新审视

发布时间：2019-07-30 21:48

【摘要】：我国公诉案件的起诉制度在1996年刑事诉讼法修改中吸收了"起诉状一本主义"因素,将"案卷移送制度"改造为"复印件移送制度"。这种具有折衷主义的"中间道路"因遗留影响法官产生预断的可能,被有些学者视为导致庭审空洞化的祸首。在2012年的刑事诉讼法修改又退回到1979年刑事诉讼法"案卷移送制度"的原位。从刑事诉讼程序正义视角来看,"复印件移送制度"并非是审判程序改革错接病枝的集大成者,新刑事诉讼法在扩大辩护律师阅卷范围、增加庭前会议制度后,"案卷移送制度"在新的诉讼环境和制度下如何发挥功能,如何保障退回的制度与新设置的制度之间不发生功能上的冲突,仍需在程序正义的框架下进行探索,以免立法对实践的尊重转化为实践对修法的异化,出现屡改屡败的现象。
[Abstract]:In the revision of the criminal procedure law in 1996, the prosecution system of public prosecution cases in China absorbed the factor of "the doctrine of prosecution pleadings" and transformed the "file transfer system" into the "photocopy transfer system". This eclectic "middle road" is regarded by some scholars as the culprit that leads to the emptiness of the trial because of the possibility of prejudgment caused by the legacy influence of judges. In 2012, the criminal procedure law was amended and returned to the original position of the 1979 Criminal procedure Law "case file transfer system." From the perspective of criminal procedure justice, the "photocopy transfer system" is not the epitome of the trial procedure reform. After expanding the scope of defense counsel reading papers and increasing the pre-court meeting system, how does the "file transfer system" play its function under the new litigation environment and system, and how to ensure that there is no functional conflict between the returned system and the newly established system. It is still necessary to explore under the framework of procedural justice in order to avoid the transformation of legislative respect for practice into the alienation of practice to amend the law, and the phenomenon of repeated changes and repeated failures.
【作者单位】：中央财经大学法学院;
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】