我国刑事自诉圈重构论

发布时间：2018-05-14 08:09

本文选题：刑事自诉圈 + 自诉　；参考：《山东大学》2015年博士论文

【摘要】：我国刑事起诉制度实行公诉与自诉并行的双轨制,其中公诉占据主体地位,自诉作为公诉制度的补充而出现,二者共同构建了我国的刑事追诉体系。在刑事自诉制度的诸多内容中,刑事自诉圈的划定即刑事自诉案件范围的大小是刑事自诉制度理论与实践中必须首先面对和解决的重要问题,刑事自诉圈的合理与完善程度直接关系到自诉制度能否顺利运行及整个刑事司法功能是否得以有效发挥,对于刑事诉讼目的的实现具有重大的意义。1996年修正的刑事诉讼法对刑事自诉圈进行了较为具体甚至颇具突破性的规定,大幅扩张了自诉制度的适用空间,并首次创造性地规定了自诉对于公诉的监督机制。然而由于立法技术的不足,加之相关制度的阙如,自诉案件的实践运行与立法原意存在明显的悖离,而2012年新修订的刑事诉讼法对此问题并无涉及。因此有必要在系统梳理刑事自诉圈的演变规律及借鉴国外自诉圈立法模式的基础上,立足于我国当下社会转型期的时代背景和自诉制度运行的实证状况,对刑事自诉制度进行理性反思,重新合理划定刑事自诉圈。本文共分为八部分。导论部分主要就本文的选题背景、国内外的研究现状、研究意义、研究思路及方法以及可能的创新点与不足等进行了较为详细的交代。第一章论述了刑事自诉制度存在的正当性。诉权理论、刑事被害人理论、刑事诉讼谦抑理论、诉讼合意理论以及恢复性司法理论等理论对现代自诉制度的形成起到了积极的推动作用,构成了自诉制度的理论基础,也是其存在的正当性与合理性的内在依据。刑事自诉制度具有弥补公诉制度缺陷的制度性价值、有效节约司法资源的经济性价值、满足多元主体需要的社会性价值、反映亲亲相隐诉讼心理及体现无讼追求观念的社会性价值等价值蕴含。同时,刑事自诉制度能够体现刑法的基本原则、落实宽严相济的刑事政策。第二章对刑事自诉圈的建构模式进行了考察和归纳。根据世界主要国家(地区)自诉圈立法的差异,刑事自诉圈的建构模式主要分为自诉独占模式、自诉与公诉并行模式和公诉垄断下的“类自诉”模式三种。自诉独占模式发端于初民社会的私力救济,主要存在于早期的刑事诉讼制度中,如古罗马法、古日耳曼法以及英国1879年前的立法例。自诉与公诉并行模式是当今世界存在数量最多且情形最为复杂的模式,根据自诉与公诉的关系以及两者范围的消长,又可细分为德国的自诉不断扩张模式、俄罗斯的公诉扶助自诉模式、中国台湾的自诉公诉平分秋色模式、中国大陆的自诉公诉关系多元模式等几种亚模式。其中,我国的自诉圈建构的模式最为特殊：不仅自诉案件种类多,而且自诉案件与公诉案件之间关系复杂,分为“纯自诉”、“自诉转公诉”、“可公诉可自诉”、“公诉转自诉”四种情形。公诉垄断下的“类自诉”模式是指一国的刑事起诉权虽统一由国家行使,实行公诉垄断,但在诉讼制度中存在有制约公诉权并体现自诉功能和价值的相关制度的一种特殊模式。由于各国诉讼制度和司法体制的差异,“类自诉”模式在不同国家样态各异,其中美国的“类自诉”源于大陪审团制度、日本源于准起诉制度、法国源于民事原告人制度、意大利源于不告不理案件的存在。通过对刑事自诉的模式考察可知,虽然刑事起诉制度中公诉范围不断扩大、自诉范围不断缩小已逐渐成为一种世界性趋势,但自诉制度一直具有顽强的生命力；即使在自诉缺失的国家,其“自诉意蕴”仍然通过其他制度得以体现。除此之外,各国自诉圈的性质、内容都呈现出规律性特点,这对于重构我国刑事自诉圈提供了域外借鉴。第三章论述了重构我国刑事自诉圈的必要性。我国刑事诉讼法关于自诉范围的规定粗疏且紊乱,实践中问题重重,效果很不理想：自诉案件的公诉化现象严重；自诉案件的证据门槛过高；或公诉或自诉的选择导致了“同案不同罚”的处理结果；自诉案件的类型失衡。在法定的三类自诉案件中,告诉才处理案件的“圈”划得过宽,不仅暴力干涉婚姻自由罪、虐待罪和侵占罪纳入此中的正当性不足,而且侮辱罪和诽谤罪的自诉标准也不够清晰,有扩张性滥用之虞；被害人有证据证明的轻微刑事案件的“圈”边界不明,缺乏明确的自诉与公诉并存时的冲突解决机制；“公诉转自诉”案件的立法规定存在冲突,案件成立条件设定不够严谨,程序设置紊乱,导致司法机关在具体适用时无所适从,此类案件实践中几近名存实亡。第四章对影响刑事自诉圈重构的因素进行了类型化研究。一系列政治的、经济的、社会的、心理的、历史的及文化的等因素都在影响和决定着刑事自诉案件范围的大小。刑事自诉圈在重构时要受到以人为本的民生政治因素、转型了的权力斗争哲学观等哲学因素的影响,受新熟人社会及民间司法资源等社会现实和刑事自诉法文化传统的制约,要考量公民对不法行为的宽容程度,衡量公民证据掌控能力的强弱,以及兼顾国际法治环境对本土立法的影响。第五章是我国刑事自诉圈重构的具体设想,系统阐述了我国刑事自诉圈构建的理念、原则及具体设计方案。在重构刑事自诉圈时应当坚持公诉与自诉关系协调原则、确定性与灵活性相结合原则、案件性质与社会危害程度双低原则、以及法益侵害的个人性原则等原则。对于告诉才处理的案件,应当将暴力干涉婚姻自由罪、虐待罪和部分侵占罪从自诉圈中剥离出去,同时吸纳相关的亲属间财产型犯罪、侮辱尸体罪、无其他严重情节的非法侵入他人住宅罪、发生在亲属之间且无其他严重情节的过失致人重伤罪、发生在婚姻关系存续期间且无其他严重情节的强奸罪、发生在婚姻关系存续期间且无其他严重情节的强制猥亵、侮辱妇女罪等罪名；缩小司法解释中列举的“被害人有证据证明的轻微刑事案件”范围；对于“公诉转自诉”案件,应当通过制度改革来改变其近乎虚设的状态,将“公诉转自诉”从自诉案件中分离,作为一项独立的制度,其性质为“被害人申请司法审查”制度,并对被害人申请司法审查的具体制度进行了较为细致的设计。在上述具体制度设计的基础上,提出“动态自诉圈”的思路。刑事自诉圈并不是一成不变、静止不动的,而是随着社会发展而动态地变化,需要不断调整和吐故纳新。第六章对于刑事自诉圈重构的配套制度进行构建。刑事自诉圈的划定不是简单的公诉案件与自诉案件的范围界分,而是“牵一发而动全身”地受制又影响着其他多种制度。只有合理构建与之相配套的制度,才能保证自诉圈不至于名存实亡,更好地发挥作用。一是调整自诉案件的证据制度,强化自诉人的证据收集权利、提高自诉人的证据收集能力；二是规范自诉案件的审判制度,主要从确立自诉案件时效制度、增设自诉案件缺席审判制度等方面进行改革；三是健全自诉案件的监督救济制度,包括完善刑事自诉案件的审判监督制度、建立刑事自诉强制代理制度以及强化刑事被害人法律援助制度；四是建立公安及检察机关的自诉协助制度,明确公安机关处理自诉案件的程序,并构建合理的自诉与公诉制度衔接机制。结语部分认为在当下世界多元化的背景下,以理性、宽容、渐进、调和为价值观的法律制度设计必将具有更强的生命力。宽容的理性是刑事自诉制度独有的性格品质特征,人性化的刑事自诉制度应当防止自身的过分激进与扩张,应该保持一种自我克制。刑事诉讼应当秉承一种宽和理性的司法精神,以其人文关怀重构法律与民众之间缺失的亲和力,司法人员应当以“服务公民的主体性理念”去践行一种宽和的司法精神。
[Abstract]:The system of criminal prosecution in our country implements the double track system of public prosecution and private prosecution, in which public prosecution occupies the main position and the private prosecution is the supplement of the public prosecution system. The two parties have jointly established the criminal prosecution system in our country. In many contents of the criminal prosecution system, the size of the criminal self-prosecution case is the size of the criminal self prosecution case. The theory and practice of the prosecution system must first face and solve the important problems. The rationality and perfection of the criminal prosecution circle is directly related to the smooth operation of the private prosecution system and whether the whole criminal judicial function can be played effectively, and the realization of the criminal procedure is of great significance to the criminal procedure law amended in.1996 years. There are more specific and even breakthrough provisions in the private prosecution circle, which greatly expand the application space of the private prosecution system, and for the first time creatively stipulate the supervision mechanism of private prosecution for public prosecution. However, due to the lack of legislative technology and the lack of relevant systems, the practice of private prosecution cases is obviously contrary to the original intention of the legislation. The newly revised criminal procedure law in 2012 is not involved in this issue. Therefore, it is necessary to rethink the criminal self-prosecution system rationally on the basis of the systematic combing of the law of the evolution of the criminal prosecution circle and on the basis of the legislative mode of the foreign private prosecution circle, based on the background of the time of the social transformation and the demonstration of the operation of the system of self-prosecution in the present period of social transformation in China. This article is divided into eight parts. This article is divided into eight parts. The introduction part mainly deals with the background of the topic, the research status at home and abroad, the research significance, the research ideas and methods as well as the possible innovation and deficiency. The first chapter discusses the legitimacy of the existence of the system of criminal prosecution, the theory of the right of appeal and the penalty. The theory of victim, the theory of modesty in criminal litigation, the theory of litigation agreement and the theory of restorative justice have played an active role in promoting the formation of the modern self-prosecution system, and constitute the theoretical basis of the system of self-prosecution, and also the intrinsic basis for its legitimacy and rationality. The system of criminal prosecution has the defects of making up the system of public prosecution. The institutional value of the system can effectively save the economic value of judicial resources, meet the social values needed by multiple subjects, reflect the implicit litigation psychology of the relatives and the social value embodying the concept of non litigation. At the same time, the system of criminal prosecution can reflect the basic principle of criminal law and implement the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy. Second chapters The construction mode of the criminal private prosecution circle is investigated and summarized. According to the difference of the legislation of the private prosecution circle in the main countries (regions) in the world, the construction mode of the criminal private prosecution circle is mainly divided into three types of private prosecution, the parallel mode of private prosecution and public prosecution and the "class private prosecution" mode under the monopoly of public prosecution. Force relief, mainly in the early criminal procedure system, such as the ancient Rome law, the ancient Germanic law and the legislative legislation before the 1879 in Britain. The parallel mode of private prosecution and public prosecution is the most complex pattern in the world, which is the most complex in the world. The mode of prosecution continues to expand, the private prosecution mode of Russian prosecution, the private prosecution in Taiwan, China's private prosecution and the multiple modes of private prosecution relations in the mainland of China. Among them, the pattern of the construction of private prosecution in China is the most special: the relationship between private prosecution cases and the relationship between private prosecution cases and public prosecution cases is the most special. It is divided into four kinds of cases: "pure private prosecution", "private prosecution to public prosecution", "public prosecution for private prosecution" and "private prosecution to self prosecution". The "private prosecution" mode under public prosecution monopoly means that the criminal prosecution right of a country is exercised in a unified state by the state and monopolized by public prosecution. However, there are restrictions on public prosecution and the function and value of self-prosecution in the system of litigation. A special model of the related system. Because of the differences in the litigation system and the judicial system of various countries, the "class self prosecution" pattern varies in different countries. Among them, the "class private prosecution" in the United States originated from the grand jury system, Japan originated from the quasi prosecution system, the French originated from the civil plaintiff system, and the Italy originated from the existence of the case. After the investigation of the mode of criminal prosecution, it can be seen that although the scope of public prosecution in the criminal prosecution system is constantly expanding and the scope of private prosecution has been gradually reduced, it has gradually become a worldwide trend, but the system of private prosecution has always been of tenacious vitality. Even in the country where private prosecution is missing, its "private prosecution" is still reflected through other systems. In addition, the nature and content of the private prosecution circle of all countries show regular characteristics, which provides foreign reference for the reconstruction of the criminal private prosecution circle in China. The third chapter discusses the necessity of reconstructing the criminal private prosecution circle of our country. The criminal procedure law of China is rough and disorganized about the scope of the private prosecution, the problems in the practice are numerous and the effect is very unsatisfactory: the case of private prosecution: the case of private prosecution The phenomenon of public prosecution is serious; the evidence threshold of private prosecution cases is too high; or the choice of public prosecution or private prosecution leads to the treatment of "the different punishment of the same case"; the type of self prosecution case is unbalanced. In the three legal cases, it is told that the "circle" of the case is too wide, not only the violent interference of the crime of freedom of marriage, the abuse of the crime and the encroachment. The legitimacy of the crime is insufficient, and the standard of self prosecution for the offense of insult and libel is not clear enough. There is a danger of expansionary abuse; the "circle" boundary of the minor criminal cases proved by the victim is unknown, and the conflict resolution mechanism is lack of clear prosecution and public prosecution; the legislation of "public prosecution to private prosecution" is stipulated in the legislation. In the conflict, the setting conditions of the case are not strict and the procedure is set in disorder, which leads to the judiciary in the concrete application of the case. In the practice of such cases, the fourth chapters make a typed study of the factors affecting the reconstruction of the criminal private prosecution circle. A series of political, economic, social, psychological, historical and cultural. All these factors affect and determine the size of the criminal prosecution case range. The criminal self-prosecution circle should be influenced by the people based people's livelihood political factors, the philosophical view of the transformation of the power struggle and other philosophical factors, which are restricted by the social reality of new acquaintances and the civil judicial resources and the cultural tradition of the criminal self-prosecution law. The tolerance of the citizens to the wrongful act, the strength of the civil evidence control ability, and the influence of the international rule of law environment on the local legislation. The fifth chapter is the concrete assumption of the reconstruction of the criminal private prosecution circle in our country, and systematically expounds the concept, principle and specific design scheme of the construction of the criminal private prosecution circle in China. We should adhere to the principle of the coordination of the relationship between public prosecution and private prosecution, the principle of combination of certainty and flexibility, the principle of both the nature of the case and the degree of social harm, and the principle of the personal nature of the infringement of the legal interests. The crime of property type between related relatives, the crime of insulting the corpse, the crime of invading other people's residence without other serious circumstances, the serious injury caused by the negligence of other serious circumstances between relatives and no other serious circumstances, the crime of rape occurring during the duration of marriage and without other serious circumstances, occurred during the duration of marriage and without any other strictness. The compulsory indecency of the plot, the crime of insulting women and so on; narrowing the scope of "the minor criminal case of the evidence of the victim" in the judicial interpretation; for the case of "prosecution to self prosecution", the state should be changed by system reform to separate the "private prosecution" from the case of self prosecution. The nature of the system is "the victim application for judicial review" system, and a detailed design of the specific system for the application of the victim's judicial review. On the basis of the design of the specific system, the idea of "dynamic private prosecution circle" is put forward. The criminal private prosecution circle is not 10% constant, still immovable, but with the development of the society. The sixth chapter is to construct the supporting system of the reconfiguration of the criminal private prosecution circle. The delimitation of the criminal private prosecution circle is not the scope of the simple public prosecution case and the private prosecution case, but the system of "pulling one's whole body" and affecting a variety of other systems. The supporting system can ensure that the private prosecution circle is not worthy of death and play a better role. One is to adjust the evidence system of the case of private prosecution, to strengthen the right to collect the evidence of the private prosecution and to improve the ability of the self prosecutor to collect evidence; two, to standardize the trial system of private prosecution cases, and to increase the lack of private prosecution cases. The three is to improve the supervision and relief system of private prosecution cases, including the trial supervision system of the criminal self-prosecution cases, the establishment of the compulsory agent system for criminal prosecution and the strengthening of the legal aid system for the criminal victims; four, the self-prosecution assistance system for the establishment of public security and procuratorial organs, and the clear office of the public security organs. The conclusion is that in the background of the pluralism of the world, the design of the legal system which is rational, tolerant, progressive and harmonized as values will have stronger vitality. The reason of tolerance is the characteristic character of character and humanization of the criminal self-prosecution system. The criminal prosecution system should prevent its own excessively radical and expansion, and should maintain a kind of self-restraint. Criminal litigation should uphold a wide and rational judicial spirit, restructure the lack of affinity between the law and the public with its humanistic care, and the judiciary should practice a wide and broad sense of "the concept of the subjectivity of serving citizens". The spirit of judicature.

【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2015
【分类号】：D925.2

【参考文献】