我国刑事庭前证据展示制度之研究

发布时间：2018-03-12 08:13

本文选题：刑事诉讼　切入点：庭前证据展示　出处：《郑州大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：我国1996年《刑事诉讼法》并未规定庭前证据展示义务,“证据突袭”现象时有发生。控辩双方在庭审中,故意保留证据,使用“证据突袭”的做法,使对方缺乏准备、仓促应战,以达到“奇袭”的效果。违背了程序公正的本意,扭曲了刑事诉讼的根本目的。2012年我国《刑事诉讼法》修改后增加了刑事庭前证据展示的相关规定,意在保障程序正义,平衡控辩双方悬殊过大的证据收集能力,某种程度上具有了刑事庭前展示制度的雏形,但是对于形成一项完整、系统的制度来说,还有待进一步完善。完善我国刑事庭前证据展示制度,对我国“以审判为中心”的司法改革具有现实意义。首先,通过控辩双方在庭审前互相展示证据,解决了双方交流信息的障碍,使争议焦点更加明确,双方对庭审的准备更加具有针对性,增强了庭审的对抗性。其次,解决了律师阅卷难的问题,保障了被告人的辩护权,一定程度上平衡了被告人相对弱势的诉讼能力。最后,双方明确诉讼焦点,弱化法官职权行为,避免了举证突袭,提高司法效率,减少开庭次数。总体来说,完善刑事庭前证据展示制度对我国司法改革具有重要意义,对于实现刑事诉讼法规定的诉讼任务、审判任务,保障程序公正,提供积极的作用。完善我国刑事庭前证据展示制度需要对现有的证据展示规定进行细化,目前,我国《刑事诉讼法》条文中只有关于庭前展示制度的条文,缺少原则性规定,对证据展示制度的具体细节规定也不够详细明确。不仅如此,刑事诉讼具有一套严密的程序系统,因此,应当全面考虑我国刑事证据展示制度的完善策略,使之在与我国刑事诉讼法规定的其他制度契合的情况下,最大限度地发挥作用。在完善刑事庭前证据展示制度的同时,应考虑建立配套制度,包括但不限于预审法官制度、公设辩护人制度、证人保护制度等,以及进一步完善庭前会议制度。
[Abstract]:In 1996, the Criminal procedure Law of our country did not stipulate the obligation of showing evidence before the trial, and the phenomenon of "evidence raid" occurred from time to time. During the trial, the prosecution and the defense deliberately retained the evidence and used the practice of "evidence raid", which made the other side unprepared and rushed to fight. In order to achieve the effect of "surprise attack", it violates the original intention of procedural justice and distorts the fundamental purpose of criminal proceedings. In 2012, after the amendment of the Criminal procedure Law of China, the relevant provisions on the display of evidence before criminal court were added in order to guarantee procedural justice. Balancing the excessive differences between the prosecution and the defence in the ability to collect evidence, to some extent, has taken the embryonic form of the system of display before the criminal court, but for the formation of a complete and systematic system, It has practical significance for the judicial reform of our country to "take trial as the center". First of all, through the display of evidence between the two sides before the trial, It resolves the obstacles to exchange information between the two sides, makes the focus of the dispute clearer, the preparation for the trial by both sides more targeted, and enhances the adversarial nature of the trial. Secondly, it solves the problem of lawyers' difficulty in marking papers, and ensures the defendant's right to defense. To some extent, it balances the relatively weak litigation ability of the defendant. Finally, both sides clearly define the focus of the proceedings, weaken the judge's authority, avoid the evidence raid, improve the judicial efficiency, and reduce the number of court sessions. Generally speaking, Perfecting the system of evidence display before the criminal court is of great significance to the judicial reform of our country. It is of great significance to the realization of the procedural tasks, the trial tasks, and the guarantee of procedural justice, as stipulated in the Criminal procedure Law. To improve the pre-court evidence display system in our country, we need to refine the existing provisions on the display of evidence. At present, there is only a provision on the pre-court display system in the articles of the Criminal procedure Law of our country, which lacks the provisions of principle. Moreover, the criminal procedure has a set of strict procedural system. Therefore, we should consider the perfect strategy of our criminal evidence display system in an all-round way. While perfecting the system of showing evidence before the criminal court, we should consider establishing a supporting system, including, but not limited to, the system of pre-trial judges. Public defender system, witness protection system, and further improve the pretrial meeting system.
【学位授予单位】：郑州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】