被害人刑事诉讼权利研究

发布时间：2018-04-29 15:42

  本文选题：被害人 + 刑事诉讼权利　； 参考：《吉林大学》2016年博士论文

【摘要】：本文以被害人刑事诉讼权利为研究对象,以我国刑事诉讼法修订为背景,综合运用比较分析与价值分析的方法,反思我国刑事诉讼立法及司法实践中对被害人刑事诉讼权利保护的不足及其问题的根源。并从刑事诉讼构造及刑事诉权等方面分析导致这种情况的原因,提出在我国当前刑事诉讼模式下,完善被害人权利保护的思路。本文写作目的可以分为三个层次:第一层次为完善我国的被害人刑事诉讼权利保护提供解决方案;第二层次为我国的刑事诉讼提供更为合理的诉讼模式;最后为我国的人权保护提供新的解决思路。笔者通过对被害人刑事诉权与刑事诉讼权利之间的内在联系、刑事诉讼构造与被害人刑事诉讼权利之间的关系进行了研究,发现在我国现行的刑事诉讼模式下,公诉机关与被害人在刑事诉讼中的分歧是难免的。现行的刑事诉讼模式不能充分反映被害人对刑事诉讼的期待和请求,可能忽视被害人在刑事诉讼中的权利,甚至造成对被害人的“二次伤害”。刑事案件的复杂性、隐蔽性使得仅依靠被害人自身能力,很难实现对刑事犯罪的有效追诉,因此,国家公诉有其现实的合理性。然而,在国家主义思想的影响下,国家和社会的利益被认为高于被害人的私人利益,因此,国家在进行公诉时,以维护国家和社会的公共利益作为首要的出发点。而这必将与被害人的期待产生分歧。当被害人的诉讼请求不能为公诉采纳甚至为国家公诉忽视时,被害人与公诉机关甚至与国家之间的矛盾就此产生了。我国近年不断出现的上访、闹访现象有相当一部分根源于此。文章从诉的利益的角度进行了分析,发现在刑事诉讼中受到犯罪行为侵害的不仅包括国家与社会的公共利益,还有作为犯罪直接承受者的被害人的私人利益。因此,刑事诉讼中的控诉应当包括国家之诉与被害人之诉,也即公诉与私诉。近现代以来,在刑事诉讼中国家公诉主义成为现代各国刑事诉讼的主流,被害人的私诉被排除于刑事诉讼(公诉案件)之外。因此,在现有诉讼模式下,如果能使私诉以适当的方式回归刑事诉讼,让被害人更有效的参与公诉案件的诉讼活动,那么,被害人与国家之间的矛盾也就可以在一定程度上化解。但是,让私诉回归刑事诉讼的一个基本前提是,不会对犯罪嫌疑人、被告人造成双重负担,不会导致控辩力量的失衡。本文预期的创新之处在于,通过对现有的刑事诉讼构造理论进行改造,使之成为一种更加科学合理的刑事诉讼模式。笔者提出了建立一种新的刑事诉讼构造——“四元三极”刑事诉讼构造。这种诉讼构造在肯定了控、辩、裁作为刑事诉讼基本职能的前提下,对控诉职能进行了深入分析。以往我国在刑事诉讼中,控诉职能由公诉机关掌握,被害人在控诉活动中所起到的实际作用甚微,这也是被害人的刑事诉讼权利不能得到有效保障的根源。因此,在笔者提出的这种刑事诉讼构造下,将刑事控诉具体细分为被害人私诉与国家公诉。在不额外增加控诉权利的情况下,由公诉机关与被害人在同一诉讼程序中分别提出各自的控诉请求。这两种控诉方向一致,但出发点和具体要求不尽相同。这样不仅可以使被害人能够在刑事诉讼中真正实现其当事人地位,而且也不会导致刑事控诉权的扩张。“四元三极”刑事诉讼构造的价值在于将刑事控诉权进行了准确的分配,既避免了公诉遮蔽私诉所导致的侵害被害人利益的情况出现,也防止了私诉不能参与控诉的缺陷。而且,这种诉讼构造也充分体现了当事人的利益处分自由,与恢复性司法、协商性司法的许多原理在根本上是一致的。以这种构造思想为指导,笔者对我国刑事诉讼立法中,被害人刑事诉讼权利保护不够完善的地方进行了分析,并提出了相应的完善建议。本文认为,作为受到刑事犯罪直接侵害的主体,被害人在刑事诉讼中的地位和作用不可忽视。如何在保证被害人刑事诉讼权利的同时,兼顾诉讼的公平与效率,并且不违背刑事诉讼中控辩平衡的基本原则,这也是本文希望能够实现的目标。基于此,本文提出在“四元三极”刑事诉讼构造下,建立“公诉为主、私诉为辅”的新诉讼模式,实现对被害人权利的合理保护。
[Abstract]:Taking the victim's right of criminal procedure as the research object, taking the amendment of the criminal procedure law of our country as the background and using the method of comparative analysis and value analysis, this paper rethinks the deficiency of the protection of the right of the victim's criminal litigation in the criminal procedure legislation and judicial practice of our country and the root of the problem, and from the criminal litigation structure and the criminal litigant right. The reasons for this situation are analyzed, and the ideas of improving the protection of the rights of the victims are put forward under the current mode of criminal procedure in China. The purpose of this article can be divided into three levels: the first level provides a solution to improve the protection of the rights of the victims in our country, and the second level provides more reasonable for the criminal proceedings in our country. In the end, it provides a new solution for the protection of human rights in China. Through the internal relationship between the victim's criminal litigious right and the right of criminal litigation, the author studies the relationship between the criminal litigation structure and the rights of the victim's criminal litigation, and finds that under the current criminal litigation mode of our country, the public prosecution organ and the victim The differences in criminal proceedings are unavoidable. The current mode of criminal procedure can not fully reflect the victim's expectation and request for criminal proceedings. It may neglect the rights of the victim in the criminal proceedings and even cause the "two injury" to the victim. The complexity of the criminal case, and the concealment of the victim's own ability, can only rely on the victim's own ability. It is difficult to realize the effective prosecution of criminal offences, therefore, national public prosecution has its realistic rationality. However, under the influence of nationalism, the interests of the state and society are considered to be higher than the private interests of the victims. Therefore, the state and the public interests of the state and society are the primary starting point for the state and the public interests to be maintained in public prosecution. There is a disagreement with the expectation of the victim. When the lawsuit request of the victim can not be adopted for the public prosecution and even the state prosecution is ignored, the contradiction between the victim and the public prosecution and even the state has come into being. In recent years, a considerable number of visits in our country have come from this. The article has been carried out from the point of view of the interests of the prosecution. It is found that the criminal action infringed on the criminal action not only includes the public interests of the state and the society, but also the private interests of the victims who are the victims of the crime directly. Therefore, the prosecution in the criminal procedure should include the state lawsuit and the victim's lawsuit, that is, public prosecution and private prosecution. Public prosecution has become the mainstream of modern criminal proceedings in various countries. The private prosecution of the victim is excluded from the criminal procedure (public prosecution case). Therefore, under the existing litigation mode, if the private prosecution can return to the criminal procedure in a proper way and let the victim participate more effectively in the prosecution case, the spear between the victim and the state will be more effective. The shield can be resolved to a certain extent. However, a basic premise for the return of the private prosecution to the criminal procedure is that it will not cause a double burden on the criminal suspects and the defendants, and will not lead to the imbalance of the power of the accusation. The author puts forward the establishment of a new criminal procedure structure, "four yuan and three poles" in criminal procedure structure. This litigation structure has made a thorough analysis of the function of prosecution under the premise of affirming the basic functions of the criminal litigation. The actual role of the victim in the prosecution activities is very small, which is also the root of the criminal litigation rights of the victim. Therefore, under the structure of the criminal procedure proposed by the author, the criminal prosecution is subdivided into the private prosecution and the state public prosecution. Under the circumstances, the public prosecution organs and the victims in the same proceedings put forward their respective complaints. The two accusations are in the same direction, but the starting points and specific requirements are different. This will not only enable the victim to truly realize its litigant status in the criminal proceedings, but also will not lead to the expansion of the right of criminal prosecution. "Four The value of the structure of the criminal procedure of the yuan and three poles "lies in the accurate allocation of the right of criminal prosecution, which avoids the occurrence of the infringement of the interests of the victims caused by the public prosecution, and also prevents the imperfection of the private prosecution from being unable to participate in the prosecution. Moreover, the litigation structure also fully embodies the freedom of the parties' disposition of interests and the restorative nature of the litigants. Judicature, the many principles of negotiated judicature are fundamentally consistent. Guided by this structural thought, the author analyses the inadequate protection of the rights of the victims in criminal proceedings in our country, and puts forward the corresponding suggestions. This article believes that, as the subject of the direct infringement of criminal offences, the author is victimization. The status and role of people in criminal proceedings can not be ignored. How to ensure the rights of the victims in criminal proceedings, take into account the fairness and efficiency of the litigation, and do not violate the basic principles of the balance of the accusation and defense in the criminal proceedings. This is the goal that this article hopes to achieve. Based on this, this paper puts forward the structure of "four yuan and three poles" in criminal procedure. Next, we should set up a new litigation mode of "public prosecution is the main form and private litigation is subsidiary", so as to realize the reasonable protection of victims' rights.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D925.2
，

本文编号：1820562