發(fā)布時間：2018-02-26 21:23

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 民事檢察建議權(quán) 合理性 檢察權(quán) 法律監(jiān)督　出處：《天津商業(yè)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：民事檢察建議雖然已實施了很長一段時間,但是對該制度的理論研究一直處于相對滯后的狀態(tài)。理論工作者們似乎一直對這項制度提不起興趣,反倒是實踐工作者對該制度的討論表現(xiàn)出了極大的熱情。有關(guān)民事檢察建議權(quán)這一權(quán)力合理性的討論,以及民事檢察建議權(quán)行使中與審判權(quán)以及訴權(quán)的關(guān)系的處理等等這些問題的研究都處于比較初始的階段。本文以民事檢察建議正式寫入現(xiàn)行《民事訴訟法》為契機,論證該權(quán)力的合理性,其理論意義在于進一步厘清民事檢察建議權(quán)與審判權(quán)、公民訴權(quán)的關(guān)系,以及通過不同法系之間的制度比較,研究檢察機關(guān)的檢察權(quán)性質(zhì)與民事檢察建議權(quán)的關(guān)系,闡述民事檢察建議權(quán)作為我國檢察機關(guān)新增的法律監(jiān)督方式,構(gòu)成二元監(jiān)督模式中的“一元”,在該模式下既有利于檢察機關(guān)充分發(fā)揮其作為法律監(jiān)督機關(guān)的職能,又可保證個案的公平公正價值的實現(xiàn);實踐意義在于通過對于民事檢察建議權(quán)合理性的論證,堅定實踐該權(quán)力的信心,也為該權(quán)力的實施和完善提供建議。第一部分,“導(dǎo)言”。從我國民事檢察建議權(quán)的形成過程和內(nèi)涵進行闡釋,并對現(xiàn)如今學(xué)界中存在的關(guān)于我國民事檢察建議權(quán)的價值合理性、體系合理性、經(jīng)驗合理性的質(zhì)疑進行闡述。第二部分,“民事檢察建議權(quán)的價值合理性”。主要從公平正義與效率、社會正義與意志自由兩個方面著手,通過對與之相關(guān)的法哲學(xué)理論研究,從價值層面分析民事檢察建議權(quán)的合理性。第三部分,“民事檢察建議權(quán)的體系合理性”。從司法實踐中調(diào)查到的案例入手,主要從民事檢察建議權(quán)與審判權(quán)、訴權(quán)的關(guān)系兩個方面,對新民訴法第208、209條進行重點分析,論證民事檢察建議權(quán)的介入是否與審判權(quán)、訴權(quán)存在沖突,是否影響權(quán)力(利)的正常適用,是否破壞民事訴訟平衡結(jié)構(gòu)。第四部分,“民事檢察建議權(quán)的經(jīng)驗合理性”。通過搜集最高人民檢察院司法實踐中制發(fā)民事檢察建議的數(shù)據(jù)及分析,以及對某一基層檢察院近幾年的制發(fā)數(shù)據(jù),總結(jié)出每年制發(fā)總數(shù)據(jù),以及各類檢察建議的適用狀況及回復(fù)狀況,分析具體案例,觀察司法實踐中適用民事檢察建議的案件中,民事檢察建議權(quán)與審判權(quán)、訴權(quán)之間的關(guān)系。第五部分,“民事檢察建議權(quán)合理性的比較法說明”。通過分析兩大法系一些國家的民事檢察建議權(quán)存在狀態(tài)和檢察權(quán)的性質(zhì)兩個方面,闡述其對民事檢察建議權(quán)的影響,發(fā)現(xiàn)檢察權(quán)的定位決定了民事檢察建議權(quán)的存在與否。將具有相似民事檢察建議權(quán)的前蘇聯(lián)、俄羅斯和中國進行比較,從檢察機關(guān)參與民事訴訟的介入范圍比較發(fā)現(xiàn),我國和前蘇聯(lián)、俄羅斯都將檢察機關(guān)定義為國家法律監(jiān)督機關(guān),民事檢察建議權(quán)的存在與檢察機關(guān)的檢察權(quán)性質(zhì)存在關(guān)系。第六部分,“民事檢察建議權(quán)的完善對策”。主要從兩個方面提出對策,分別是強化民事檢察建議的實效性并建立追蹤機制,規(guī)范民事檢察建議的運行操作機制。通過論文前幾部分的分析,闡述該制度存在的合理性和必要性,真正意義上的法律制度是有法律效力的,不僅僅是工作制度,是保證法律尊嚴(yán)的,公權(quán)力的每個行為都應(yīng)是有法律意義的行為,所以應(yīng)確保民事檢察建議的法律效力。制度的模糊性會導(dǎo)致合理性的喪失,完善是為了保證制度的合理性,所以應(yīng)進一步厘清制度中權(quán)力邊界問題以及民事檢察建議和抗訴的銜接問題。第七部分,“結(jié)語”。概括來講,民事檢察建議權(quán)從價值合理性、體系合理性和經(jīng)驗合理性三個方面來看都能體現(xiàn)出其存在的價值,只是因為其剛具備“合法身份”,相關(guān)的制度設(shè)計并不完善,需要進行對相關(guān)條文予以具體化和明確化,以確保民事檢察建議權(quán)的監(jiān)督范圍和職責(zé)。
[Abstract]:Although the civil procuratorial suggestion has been implemented for a long time, but the theoretical study of the system has been in a relatively backward state. The theory workers of this system seems to have been uninterested, but the workers in practice on the system showed great enthusiasm. To discuss the rationality of the civil procuratorial suggestions the right of the power, and the civil procuratorial suggestions in exercise of the right and the judicial authority and litigation related processing and so on the research of these problems are in the initial stages of comparison. This article takes the civil procuratorial proposals formally write current civil procedure law > < as an opportunity to demonstrate the rationality of power, its theoretical significance is to further clarify the civil procuratorial suggestions the relationship between power and jurisdiction, civil litigation, and through the comparison between common law and civil law system of procuratorial organs, procuratorial suggestions and nature of civil procuratorial rights The relationship between civil right of legal supervision of procuratorial suggestions as the new way of China's procuratorial organs, supervision mode consisting of two yuan in "one yuan", in this mode is conducive to the procuratorial organ as the legal supervision organs and give full play to its function, it can ensure the realization of the fair value of the case; the practical significance is that the civil procuratorial suggestion right rationality, firm confidence in the practice of power, also provides suggestions for the implementation of power and perfect. The first part, "Introduction". From the formation process and explains the connotation of civil procuratorial suggestion right in China, and now in academic circles exist on civil procuratorial suggestions China's power system rationality, value rationality, rationality of the experience. The second part elaborates the question, "the value rationality" of civil procuratorial suggestion right. Mainly from the justice and efficiency of social justice. Start with the two aspects of free will, based on the philosophy of law and the relevant theoretical research, analysis of rationality of civil procuratorial suggestion right from the aspect of value. In the third part, "the civil procuratorial suggestion right system rationality. To start the investigation from the case in the judicial practice, mainly from the authority and jurisdiction of civil procuratorial proposals, two a right relationship, focus on analysis of the new civil procedure law article 208209th, whether civil rights demonstration procuratorial suggestions and judicial intervention right, right conflict, whether the impact of power (right) of the normal application, whether the destruction of balance structure of civil action. The fourth part," the civil procuratorial suggestion right experience by collecting highest rationality. The people's Procuratorate judicial practice system and data analysis of civil procuratorial suggestions, as well as on a grassroots Procuratorate in recent years data issued, summed up the annual general data, and The status of application of all kinds of procuratorial suggestions and recovery status, analysis of the specific case, to observe the application of civil procuratorial suggestions in the judicial practice in the case of civil jurisdiction and procuratorial suggestions, between the relationship between the right to sue. In the fifth part, the comparative law rationality of civil procuratorial suggestion right that ". Through two aspects analysis of some two the law of civil procuratorial suggestion right existing state and the procuratorial power, the influence of civil procuratorial suggestion right, find the position of procuratorial decision of civil procuratorial suggestion right existence. With similar civil procuratorial suggestion right of the former Soviet Union, Russia and China comparison, comparison from the scope of intervention authorities involved in civil lawsuit in China, and the former Soviet Union, Russia will be defined as the procuratorial organs of state organs for legal supervision, the procuratorial power and procuratorial power of procuratorial suggestions There are relationship. The sixth part, "countermeasures" civil procuratorial suggestion right. The main countermeasures are put forward from two aspects, which are strengthening the effectiveness of civil procuratorial suggestions and establish a tracking mechanism, operation mechanism of procuratorial suggestions of civil norms. Through the analysis of the previous part of the thesis, rationality and the necessity of the system the legal system on real significance is legal, is not only a work system, is to ensure the dignity of law, every action of public power should be legal behavior, it should ensure that the civil procuratorial suggestions on the legal effect of fuzzy system would lead to the loss of rationality, in order to improve the rationality the guarantee system, so it should further clarify the power in the system boundary and the convergence problem of civil procuratorial suggestions and protest. The seventh part is "conclusion". Generally speaking, the civil procuratorial Right from the value rationality, rationality and rationality of system experience three aspects can reflect the value of its existence, just because its just have the "legal status", the design of the system is not perfect, need to be specific and clear of the relevant provisions, to ensure that the scope of supervision of civil rights and duties of procuratorial suggestions.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：天津商業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D925.1;D926.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 羅朝慧;;黑格爾自由—權(quán)利辯證法視野下財產(chǎn)所有權(quán)概念的三層自由意境[J];東北師大學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2015年05期

2 張衛(wèi)平;;民事訴訟檢察監(jiān)督實施策略研究[J];政法論壇;2015年01期

3 徐鶴喃;;制度內(nèi)生視角下的中國檢察改革[J];中國法學(xué);2014年02期

4 張國清;;羅爾斯難題:正義原則的誤讀與批評[J];中國社會科學(xué);2013年10期

5 熊躍敏;;承繼與超越:新民事訴訟法檢察監(jiān)督制度解讀[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年02期

6 廖中洪;;關(guān)于完善《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法修正案(草案)》有關(guān)“檢察建議”規(guī)定的若干問題[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報;2012年03期

7 湯維建;;論中國民事行政檢察監(jiān)督制度的發(fā)展規(guī)律[J];政治與法律;2010年04期

8 趙旭東;;論訴權(quán)、審判權(quán)、檢察權(quán)在民事訴訟中的制衡關(guān)系[J];政治與法律;2009年06期

9 丁三東;;論黑格爾自由生活與世界歷史進程思想[J];四川大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2009年03期

10 江偉;謝俊;;論民事檢察監(jiān)督的方式和地位——基于憲法和民事訴訟法的分析[J];法治研究;2009年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張學(xué)武;民事訴訟檢察監(jiān)督制度研究[D];山東大學(xué);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 李艷磊;論公平與效率[D];西南政法大學(xué);2012年

2 常麗;民事檢察建議——從試點到制度構(gòu)建[D];中國政法大學(xué);2010年

3 劉傳濤;中外民事檢察制度研究[D];大連海事大學(xué);2003年

，

本文編號：1539722