新刑诉法证人出庭作证问题实证研究

发布时间：2018-03-25 22:49

本文选题：证人出庭作证　切入点：证人作证保护　出处：《西南政法大学》2016年硕士论文

【摘要】：为了提高证人出庭作证率,提高庭审实质化水平,保障刑事被告人质证权,2012年《刑事诉讼法》对证人出庭作证有关制度进行了增修。那么,证人出庭作证制度的立法目的有没有在司法实践中获得实现?以及获得什么程度的实现?因此,对新刑事诉讼法下证人出庭作证问题实证研究,具有较大的理论与实践意义。本文运用实证研究以及比较研究等研究方法,首先新刑诉法修改前后证人出庭作证规范方面的变化得出两者规范方面的相同点与不同点;其次对新刑诉法下证人出庭作证实际状态与成因透视,发现存在的问题并分析其中的原因;最后以前两项研究的为基础,提出了相应的建议。除引言外,全文共有三部分:第一部分从规范角度对2012年《刑事诉讼法》修改前后证人出庭作证规范进行比较。第一,运用比较研究方法对2012年《刑事诉讼法》修改前后证人出庭作证规范进行比较发现,为了解决证人出庭难这一立法目的,本次《刑事诉讼法》修改完善了质证规则,将质证规则与2012年《刑事诉讼法》187条规定的关键证人出庭作证条件相衔接;为了保障刑事被告人诉讼权利的实现,2012年《刑事诉讼法》新增规定第187条明确规定了证人出庭作证案件范围;为了发挥证人证言作为言辞证据的优势,避免庭审走过场,2012年《刑事诉讼法》新增强制证人出庭及拒绝作证的制裁制度;为解决证人出庭作证的后顾之忧,新增了对证人及其近亲属的保护与证人作证补贴。第二部分为对新刑诉法下证人出庭作证实际状态进行考察与成因透视。通过对法官的问卷调查及个人访谈的方式,对新刑诉法下证人出庭作证实际状态进行考察与成因透视,笔者粗略了解到我国证人出庭作证的情况没有得到根本性的改善,而且我国证人出庭作证一些新规定仍然存在一定程度的缺陷。首先,从公检法对待证人出庭作证态度来看,他们是消极的。为了达到绩效考核标准,一些司法工作人员片面追求工作效率而不希望证人出庭作证。其次,虽然2012年《刑事诉讼法》加强了对证人的保护力度,但是受保护案件范围模糊以及证人保护主体不明容易导致责任推诿。再次,证人作证补贴范围、标准以及程序在立法中缺乏可操作性的实施细则,以致于证人作证补贴制度在司法实践中不能有效落实。最后,由于我国《刑事诉讼法》与司法解释中的一些规定存在一定的冲突,导致我国的实体制裁措施难以发挥作用。这些都在司法实践中妨碍证人出庭作证,使得解决证人出庭作证问题仍旧任重道远。第三部分为我国刑事诉讼证人出庭作证制度之完善。为保障2012年《刑事诉讼法》中证人出庭作证制度的有效贯彻和落实,结合前面的分析路径,笔者从以下几个方面提出对我国刑事诉讼证人出庭作证制度进行完善的建议:第一,已有的绩效考核机制决定了司法工作人员的立功受奖、职务升迁、薪资待遇等现实利益,其不仅要求公安机关在保证案件公平、公正的情况下,快速破案,而且要求检察院、法院快速结案,是带有浓重的行政化色彩的绩效考核标准。这样的考核机制使得司法机关不愿证人出庭作证,因此,笔者首先建议改革已有的绩效考核机制。第二,由于有些法官没有严格把握证人出庭作证条件中的“必要性”条件已经辩方根据《刑事诉讼法》第187条第一款申请证人出庭权缺乏有效保障,因此完善我国证人出庭作证条件,制约法官的自由裁量权。第三,由于我国证人不出庭作证的惩罚措施不够完善,建议通过修改《刑事诉讼法》或者司法解释来完善不出庭作证的惩罚措施。第四,由于我国《刑事诉讼法》在保障措施方面不完善,因此,应进一步完善安全保障、经费保障、社会保障与权利保障等方面的保障措施。
[Abstract]:In order to improve the witness rate, improve the essence of the trial level, to protect the rights of the criminal defendants, 2012 "Criminal Procedure Law" on the witness system were revised. Then, the legislative purpose of witness system has not been implemented in judicial practice? And achieved so on what degree? The new criminal procedure law under the witness of empirical research, has a greater theoretical and practical significance. This paper uses empirical research and comparative research methods, firstly, the new criminal procedure law before and after modification of witness testifying in the regulatory changes reached the same point between norms and different points; secondly on the new criminal law system witness the actual state and perspective of the cause, found the existing problems and reasons analysis; finally, two previous studies as the foundation, in addition to put forward the corresponding proposal. The introduction, the thesis consists of three parts: the first part of the 2012 "Criminal Procedure Law > modified witness from a normative point of view to testify norms were compared. First, by using the method of comparative study on 2012" Criminal Procedure Law > before and after modification of the witness norms were compared, in order to solve the difficulties of witness appearing in court that the purpose of legislation. A "Criminal Procedure Law > amending and perfecting the interrogation rules, conditions of convergence of key witnesses will testify the interrogation rules and in 2012" criminal procedure law provisions of article >187 in court; in order to guarantee the realization of criminal defendant, 2012 "Criminal Procedure Law > new provisions of article 187th stipulates the witness case scope; in order to play the advantages of the testimony of witnesses as verbal evidence, the trial to avoid going through the motions, 2012" Criminal Procedure Law > new witnesses refused to testify and sanction system; in order to solve the license The court added protection and menace from the rear, the witness of witnesses and their close relatives to testify. The second part is to subsidize the new criminal procedure law under the witness of the actual state and causes. Based on the perspective of the questionnaire survey and individual interviews, the new criminal procedure law under the actual state of the witness on investigation and reasons, the author roughly understand that our country witness situation has not been fundamentally improved, but also our country witness some of the new rules still have some defects. First of all, from the public law treat witnesses testifying attitude, they are negative. In order to achieve the performance appraisal standards, some judicial the staff did not want one-sided pursuit of efficiency witnesses. Secondly, although the 2012 "Criminal Procedure Law" strengthen the protection of witnesses, but. The scope of the case and support fuzzy witness protection the main unknown easily lead to buck. Thirdly, witness the scope of subsidies, standards and procedures for the lack of detailed rules for the implementation of the legislation, to witness the subsidy system can not be effectively implemented in the judicial practice. Finally, because of China's "criminal procedure law" and the judicial interpretation. Some of the provisions of the conflict between entities in China lead to sanctions is difficult to play a role in the judicial practice. All these hinder the witnesses, the witness to solve the problem is still a long way to go. The third part of China's criminal witness system perfect. Effective implementation for the protection of the Criminal Procedure Law > < 2012 in witness system, combined with the analysis of the path in front, the author proposed to our country criminal witness system from the following aspects The degree of improvement suggestions: first, the existing performance appraisal mechanism determines the judicial personnel's meritorious service, promotion, salary and other practical benefits, which not only requires the public security organs in the case to ensure rapid detection fairness, justice, and requirements, the procuratorate, the court is fast closing, with administrative color the strong performance evaluation criteria. This evaluation mechanism allows the judiciary to witness, therefore, the author first proposed to reform the existing performance appraisal mechanism. Second, because some judges do not strictly hold the witness in the condition of "necessity" conditions according to the law of criminal procedure has been the first application for > 187th the right to witness the lack of effective protection, thus improving our witness conditions, discretion to restrict the. Third, because our country witnesses not to testify Punishment is not perfect, by amending the criminal procedure law and judicial interpretation to improve "not to testify punishment. Fourth, as China's" Criminal Procedure Law > is not perfect, in security measures, therefore, should further improve the security, financial security, safeguard social security and rights protection.

【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】