论侦查程序的司法控制

发布时间：2019-01-08 20:37

【摘要】： 侦查行为指侦查机关为收集、发现证据和保全犯罪嫌疑人而进行的各种专门调查活动和强制措施，不同的侦查行为前后联结，形成一个完整的侦查程序。侦查程序是常态社会条件下最深刻地影响公民权利的国家权力运作程序，国家权力尤其是国家强制力量的充分运用，是刑事侦查程序最重要的特征。侦查权存在的合理性和必要性并不能保证一切侦查活动都是善举。权力作为国家履行其保障权利的义务的条件和后盾，也可能导致国家对其义务的背离，即权力有时存有不公正对待乃至非法侵害权利的危险。从人权保障的观念和中外无数错误审判错误侦查的经验表明，必须在侦查的必要性与公民权利保障的要求之间求得平衡，，必须对侦查程序中的人权切实加以保障。但是，要保护被追诉人的权利免受侦查权力的侵害，既不能靠自身的反抗来达到，也不能靠侦查机构和侦查官员来保护公民权利。因为同一官署忽而忙于维护国家利益，忽而又将国家利益弃置一边，忙于维护正义，显然极不协调，也同心理学的规律相矛盾。出于公正地追诉和公正地保护的需要，制约侦查权以保障人权的权力应当与侦查权的主动性相区别，而司法权具有被动性、消极性，正好适应前述需要的要求，所以，以司法权制约侦查权，是防止侦查权滥用、维护自由与权利的根本途径。侦查程序中的人权，从人权的发展轨迹和联合国人权宪章中的规定来看，就是被追诉的公民个人的人权，但是历史事实说明，侦查程序保护的人权，并不仅仅是犯罪嫌疑人和被告人的人权，更重要的是，所有公民的人权都能通过侦查程序得到保护。以司法权控制侦查程序就是将强制侦查权分割为申请权和决定权并赋予不同的诉讼主体，这就抑制了侦查机关因客观上的需要而滥用强制侦查手段的可能。我国侦查程序现行的控制方式为侦查机关的内部控制和检察机关的制约，不存在司法控制所具有的分权机制，这是侦查权得不到有效制约和侦查权滥用现象严重的根本原因。为此，本文在借鉴西方法治国家以司法权控制侦查程序的经验的基础上，就我国以司法权控制侦查程序及其相关制度建设提出了自己的建议。
[Abstract]:Investigation behavior refers to all kinds of special investigation activities and compulsory measures carried out by investigative organs for collecting, discovering evidence and preserving criminal suspects. Different investigation acts are connected before and after the investigation, forming a complete investigation procedure. Investigation procedure is the operating procedure of state power which has the most profound influence on citizens' rights under normal social conditions. The most important feature of criminal investigation procedure is the full use of state power, especially the compulsory power of the state. The rationality and necessity of the existence of investigation power can not guarantee that all investigation activities are good deeds. Power, as the condition and backing for the state to fulfill its obligation to protect the right, may also lead to the deviation of the state from its obligation, that is, the power sometimes has the danger of unfair treatment and even illegal infringement of the right. From the concept of human rights protection and the experience of innumerable wrong trial in China and abroad, it is necessary to strike a balance between the necessity of investigation and the requirement of the protection of civil rights, and to ensure the human rights in the procedure of investigation. However, to protect the rights of the accused from the infringement of investigative power, can not rely on their own resistance to achieve, can not rely on investigative agencies and investigators to protect civil rights. Because the same official is sometimes busy defending the national interests, sometimes throwing aside the national interests and defending justice, it is obviously very inconsistent and contradictory with the laws of psychology. Due to the need of impartial prosecution and fair protection, the power to restrict investigation power in order to protect human rights should be distinguished from the initiative of investigative power, and judicial power is passive and negative, which is exactly in line with the requirements mentioned above, so, Restricting investigation power by judicial power is the fundamental way to prevent the abuse of investigation power and safeguard freedom and right. The human rights in the investigation procedure can be seen from the development track of human rights and the provisions of the UN Human Rights Charter, that is, the human rights of the individual citizen prosecuted, but historical facts show that the human rights protected by the investigative procedure are human rights. Not only the human rights of suspects and defendants, but also the human rights of all citizens can be protected through investigation procedures. The judicial power to control the investigation procedure is to divide the compulsory investigation power into the application right and the decision right and endow different litigant. This inhibits the possibility that investigative organs abuse coercive investigative techniques because of objective needs. The current control mode of the investigation procedure in our country is the internal control of the investigation organ and the restriction of the inspection organ, and there is no decentralization mechanism of the judicial control. This is the fundamental reason why the investigation power cannot be effectively controlled and the investigation power abuse is serious. Therefore, on the basis of drawing lessons from the experience of western countries ruled by law to control the investigation procedure with judicial power, The author puts forward some suggestions on how to control the investigation procedure with judicial power and the construction of related system in our country.
【学位授予单位】：四川大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2002
【分类号】：D918

【相似文献】