發(fā)布時間：2018-02-26 05:00

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 非法證據(jù) 瑕疵證據(jù) 處理機(jī)制 預(yù)防機(jī)制　出處：《華東政法大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：在《兩個證據(jù)規(guī)定》以出臺之前，我國對于證據(jù)能力很少進(jìn)行規(guī)范，只要符合法定證據(jù)形式，證據(jù)幾乎可不受限制地進(jìn)入庭審并最終作為定案根據(jù)，因此也縱容了各種非法取證行為，針對這個問題，《兩個證據(jù)規(guī)定》對非法及瑕疵證據(jù)規(guī)定了大量的審查判斷以及排除規(guī)則，2012《刑事訴訟法》也對于相關(guān)內(nèi)容進(jìn)行了有益吸收，然而這些規(guī)定主要是針對法庭審理階段證據(jù)的審查判斷，學(xué)術(shù)界關(guān)于非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的探討也多從理論角度出發(fā)，缺乏對于檢察機(jī)關(guān)如何將這些規(guī)定具體落實(shí)的機(jī)制探討，而正是由于相應(yīng)機(jī)制的缺乏，各地檢察機(jī)關(guān)的操作標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一，甚至有的對于非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的認(rèn)識都不統(tǒng)一，實(shí)踐中還出現(xiàn)把瑕疵證據(jù)誤作非法證據(jù)排除的案例，制度的價(jià)值在于能夠在實(shí)踐中將其真正落實(shí)，而不是作為一個懸在空中的樓閣，因此本文致力于構(gòu)建非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的處理機(jī)制，以使相關(guān)證據(jù)制度能夠真正落實(shí)。另一方面，《兩個證據(jù)規(guī)定》及2012《刑事訴訟法》明確檢察機(jī)關(guān)承擔(dān)證據(jù)合法性的證明責(zé)任，并且將證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)被準(zhǔn)設(shè)定為“確實(shí)、充分”的最高標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，如果檢察機(jī)關(guān)不能證明相關(guān)證據(jù)系合法取得，則相關(guān)證據(jù)就會被排除，進(jìn)而增大了公訴敗訴的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。與之相對的是當(dāng)前我國司法資源相對不足，，而刑事立案數(shù)則有逐年遞增的趨勢，而我國目前偵查技術(shù)和偵查手段還比較落后，無法完全滿足犯罪斗爭的需要，在當(dāng)前司法環(huán)境下設(shè)立如此高的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)對檢察機(jī)關(guān)的公訴工作提出了很高的挑戰(zhàn)，為了應(yīng)對這樣的挑戰(zhàn)，保證公訴質(zhì)量、降低敗訴風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，有必要建立起針對非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的專門的處理機(jī)制，一來在審前階段實(shí)現(xiàn)對于證據(jù)質(zhì)量的把關(guān)，二來在源頭上對非法及瑕疵證據(jù)進(jìn)行防范，以更好地實(shí)現(xiàn)檢察院的訴訟監(jiān)督職能和公訴職能，更好地實(shí)現(xiàn)打擊犯罪與保障人權(quán)價(jià)值的有機(jī)統(tǒng)一。 本文主要由以下三個部分構(gòu)成： 第一部分：針對實(shí)務(wù)中混淆非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的現(xiàn)狀，筆者在從概念上和處理思路上對非法證據(jù)和瑕疵證據(jù)進(jìn)行厘清，同時我國對于非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的相關(guān)規(guī)定進(jìn)行梳理，明確了非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的外延，以及相關(guān)的舉證責(zé)任和證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)，為建立非法及瑕疵證據(jù)的處理機(jī)制構(gòu)建制度打好理論基礎(chǔ)。 第二部分：一方面，制度的價(jià)值在于落實(shí)，落實(shí)則要通過配套機(jī)制來實(shí)現(xiàn)，另一方面，新的證據(jù)規(guī)定提高了檢察機(jī)關(guān)在庭審中的證明責(zé)任，而庭審階段僅是對之前工作總結(jié)性的表現(xiàn)，如何能夠保證庭審質(zhì)量降低敗訴風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，主要在于審前階段對于證據(jù)的把控，因此建議非法及瑕疵證據(jù)處理機(jī)制能很好地實(shí)現(xiàn)上述兩項(xiàng)功能，該部分以法律規(guī)定、法理和司法實(shí)務(wù)為視角，對建立非法及瑕疵證據(jù)處理機(jī)制的必要性和可行性分別進(jìn)行論證。 第三部分：該部分從檢察機(jī)關(guān)被動應(yīng)對和主動預(yù)防兩個角度，分別就檢察機(jī)關(guān)在審前階段對非法證據(jù)和瑕疵證據(jù)的處理機(jī)制進(jìn)行探討。被動處理機(jī)制分別從處理原則、發(fā)現(xiàn)機(jī)制、處理方式等角度進(jìn)行剖析，結(jié)合對中國當(dāng)前司法環(huán)境承受能力的考量，提出適合當(dāng)前檢察機(jī)關(guān)對于不合法證據(jù)的工作機(jī)制。主動預(yù)防機(jī)制則是從檢察機(jī)關(guān)自偵案件預(yù)防機(jī)制構(gòu)建以及檢察機(jī)關(guān)審查批捕和審查起訴部門預(yù)防機(jī)制進(jìn)行構(gòu)建兩個角度來進(jìn)行論述，以期對司法實(shí)踐有所裨益。
[Abstract]:In "before two Evidence Rules > to introduced, China's evidence ability rarely norms, as long as compliance with the statutory form of evidence, evidence almost unrestricted access to the trial and final verdict as, therefore also condoned illegal evidence collection behavior, in order to solve this problem," two provisions stipulated that large amounts of evidence review and judgment of the exclusive rule of illegal evidence and flaws, 2012< Criminal Procedure Law > also for related content are beneficial absorption, but these Provisions mainly for the court evidence examination and judgment, on the illegal and defective evidence in academic circles also from a theoretical perspective, the lack of how these Provisions for the prosecution of the mechanism of the specific implementation, and it is due to the lack of the corresponding mechanism of the procuratorial organs around the operating standards, and even some understanding and defective evidence are illegal The practice is not uniform, there is also the defective evidence as the illegal evidence exclusion case, the value of the system is able to practice in the real implementation, rather than as a hanging in the air of the pavilion, so this paper is devoted to the construction of illegal handling mechanism and the defective evidence, in order to make the relevant evidence system to truly implement the other. On the one hand, "two rules of evidence and Criminal Procedure Law > > 2012< procuratorial organs bear the responsibility that the legitimacy of evidence, and will prove to be a quasi standard set for" indeed, the highest standards of sufficient ", if the prosecution can not prove that the evidence is legally obtained, relevant evidence will be excluded, thus increasing the the risk of losing. The opposite is the relative lack of judicial resources in our country, and the number of criminal cases is increasing, and the current detection technology and means of investigation is still falling Later, unable to fully meet the needs of fighting crime, the establishment of such a high standard of proof in the current legal environment puts forward higher challenge to the procuratorial organs of the public prosecution work, in order to cope with this challenge, to ensure the quality of prosecution, to reduce the risk of losing, it is necessary to establish the illegal and defective evidence special processing mechanism, way in the stage of pre-trial evidence for quality control, and the source of illegal evidence and defect prevention, to better realize the procuratorate lawsuit supervision function and the function of public prosecution, to better achieve the fight against crime and the protection of the organic unity of human rights.
This article is mainly composed of the following three parts:
The first part: according to the present situation of confusion in the practice of illegal and defective evidence, the author from the concepts and ideas of illegal evidence and the defective evidence to clarify at the same time, our country made a summary about the relevant provisions of illegal and defective evidence, the extension of the illegal and defective evidence, and the burden of proof and standard of proof. To construct a system to lay the theoretical foundation for the establishment of illegal handling mechanism and the defective evidence.
The second part: on the one hand, the value of the system lies in the implementation of the implementation needs to be realized through the matching mechanism, on the other hand, the new evidence rules to improve the proof responsibility of the procuratorial organs in the trial, and the trial is only prior to the summary of the work, how to ensure the quality of the trial can reduce the risk of losing the main. In the pre-trial stage for evidence of the control, suggested that illegal and defective evidence handling mechanism can well realize the above two functions, the part of the law, legal theory and the perspective of judicial practice, to establish illegal evidence and flaws of the necessity and feasibility of processing mechanism are demonstrated.
The third part: this part from the prosecution of passive response to active prevention and two angles, respectively, the procuratorial organs handling mechanism of the illegal evidence and the defective evidence in the pretrial stage. To investigate passive treatment mechanism were found from the processing mechanism principle, analyzes the angle of approach, based on the China current judicial environment capacity consider, proposed for the current procuratorial organs for legal evidence does not work mechanism. Active prevention mechanism is from the prosecution case prevention mechanism construction and the procuratorial organ for examination and approval of arrest and prosecution department of prevention mechanism to construct two angles to carry on the elaboration, in order to benefit the judicial practice.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東政法大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D925.2;D926.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳衛(wèi)東;;兩個證據(jù)規(guī)定之解讀[J];中國檢察官;2010年21期

2 宋英輝;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)貫徹“兩個證據(jù)規(guī)定”的幾個問題[J];中國檢察官;2011年01期

3 徐美君;;我國刑事訴訟運(yùn)行狀況實(shí)證分析[J];法學(xué)研究;2010年02期

4 楊宇冠;;死刑案件證明研究[J];人民檢察;2010年10期

5 張建升;顧永忠;熊秋紅;鄒開紅;張敬博;姚雯;;健全刑事證據(jù)規(guī)則 提高刑事案件質(zhì)量[J];人民檢察;2010年15期

6 呂廣倫;羅國良;劉雅玲;王鋒永;馮黔剛;朱晶晶;;《關(guān)于辦理刑事案件排除非法證據(jù)若干問題的規(guī)定》理解與適用[J];人民檢察;2010年16期

7 楊宇冠;;論非法證據(jù)的排除[J];人民檢察;2010年23期

8 汪建成;;中國需要什么樣的非法證據(jù)排除規(guī)則[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2006年05期

9 曾康;;言詞證據(jù)的分析與判斷——以言詞證據(jù)的結(jié)構(gòu)分析為路徑[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2009年05期

10 陳光中;;刑事證據(jù)制度改革若干理論與實(shí)踐問題之探討——以兩院三部《兩個證據(jù)規(guī)定》之公布為視角[J];中國法學(xué);2010年06期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 中國政法大學(xué)教授 樊崇義;[N];人民法院報(bào);2011年

本文編號：1536583