学位论文题名  论侦查监督
论文作者      赵利民
作者单位      吉林大学
专    业      诉讼法
指导教师      张文显
并列题名      On supervision of investigation
学位级别      303
中文文摘
    侦查权是国家权力一项重要的权力。既然是权力，对它的监督和制约已成为必然。因此，对侦查进行监督已成为刑诉法法学理论界及实践部门都关心的问题。对侦查监督已决不是检察机关一个部门的专项职能。其他诉讼参与人，包括律师、被告人、被害人以及其法定代理人、辩护人对侦查也有权进行监督，这已成为一个不争的议题。在现行刑诉法中，对侦查的监督也做了一些规定。人民检察院是法律监督机关，对公安机关侦查监督予以具体化。如立案监督、侦查行为监督等等。当然当事人（如被害人、被告人、犯罪嫌疑人以及律师）也可以对侦查进行监督，但是，这些侦查监督也存在缺陷，致使这种监督有名无实，主要表现如下：一是侦查措施、手段自由裁量化，致使侦查机关的滥用侦查权无法控制；二是专门机关监督属于事后监督，具有局限性；三是检察机关虽有权监督公安机关的侦查行为，但又有谁来监督检察机关的侦查权，这在法理上存在着困惑。四是我国刑诉法中的证据规则也在一定程度上限制了对侦查的有效监督；五是当事人对侦查权监督仍存不足。这些因素影响着对侦查权的监督，现实当中存在着刑讯逼供、漠视当事人权利也就不足为奇了。“他山之石，可以攻玉”，国外对侦查监督的一些做法仍然能值得我们借鉴。为了论述的方便，我们从大陆法系和英美法系对比的做法分别予以说明。大陆法系的侦查方式呈“双方组合”的格局，实行单轨式侦查，弱化犯罪嫌疑人的权利保障。在该种侦查制度中，很明显地强化侦查机关的侦查能力，赋予其较大的权力，减少对侦查权力的限制，以便侦查机关灵活运用各种手段迅速逼近案件的真相，从而也就弱化了被告人的诉讼防御能力，减少其自我保护手段。这种做法无疑对于查明案件真相，维护社会秩序具有重要的作用，但是又却极容易地侵犯犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的合法权益。而在英美法系中，侦查制度施行双轨式侦查，向犯罪嫌疑人方面倾斜。如违法证据排除规则、证据开示、在侦查过程中及时获得律师的协助以及充分的保释权。另外，把法官引入侦查程序中，对侦查机关的强制措施予以限制等，应当说，这种侦查制度对侦查监督体现得较为完美，保障了犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的基本权利，也有效地保障了无辜公民的正当权益，但在打击犯罪、有效维护社会秩序方面也存有不足之处。结合国内的具体情况，借鉴国外的具体做法，笔者对侦查监督之完善提出了一些看法，具体如下：一是证据规则应予以完善。对非法取得的证据应当予以排除，但对于一些特殊情况下应予例外。同时反对强迫自证其罪，鼓励坦白从宽；还应当对控、辩双方所取得的证据予以开示。二是对检察机关的侦查监督予以完善。确定检察官在侦查阶段的主导地位，对公安机关的一些侦查措施应予以限制，以及对违法侦查人员提起惩戒权等等，这当然需要一个前提条件，就是实现检察官的社会精英化。三是律师对侦查监督的完善。犯罪嫌疑人要及时获得律师帮助的权利。律师应享有调查取证权、会见权等等。笔者始终认为，以权利来限制权力才是防止权力滥用、腐败的一种重要途径。对侦查权的监督也无非是这样。我想，只有这样，我们走向法治才不会遥遥无期。
英文文摘 The power of investigation is an important power. It is necessary to supervise and restrict it now that it is a power. Therefore，it is a concerned problem to supervise the investigation for both jurisprudence in criminal procedure Law and practice departments.To supervise the investigation is not only the procuratorial organization''s special function but also that of other participants in criminal proceedings，including lawyer，the accused，victim and legal agent, defender. This is an undoubted issue。There are some regulations about supervision of investigation in Criminal Procedure Law. People'' prosecutor''s offices legal supervision organization which supervise concretely the investigation of public security organization，such as supervision of placing case on file，supervision of investigative conduct, etc. Of course，the parties including the victim，the defendant，lawyer have the right to supervise the investigation. Despite of this，these supervisions have some defaults which lead to nullification，such as the following：First，the investigative measures，methods are so out of control that the investigative organization''s power is abused. Secondly，the supervision of special organization is post and Limited . Thirdly，although the procuratorial organization supervises the pubic security organization''s investigative conduct，it is puzzled in jurisprudence that who supervises the procuratorial organization''s power of investigation. Fourthly，the rule of evidence in criminal procedure law restricts the supervision of investigation in some degree. Fifthly, supervision of the parties is insufficient.These affect the supervision of investigation so it is not surprising to extort confession by torture and neglect the party''s rights.For us，foreign country''s supervision of investigation is worthwhile. We will explain it through comparison between two legal systems in order to discuss conveniently. The system of civil law''s model of investigation is composed by two parts，and is single，which reduces the defendant right of criminal suspect. Of course，it obviously enhanced the power of investigation and the restriction is reduced so the investigative organization may disclose the truth rapidly. Although it is a very important function to disclose the case truth and to maintain the social order，it invades easily the criminal suspect, defendant''s legal interests. On the other hand，Anglo-American law system''s investigation is two-way model，which preferred the criminal suspect. For example，illegal evidence is not accepted，and evidence is discovered, the judge restricts the investigative organization''s investigative measure in the process of investigation. So the system of investigation was rather perfected for supervision of investigation because it ensures not only the criminal suspect and defendant''s basic rights but also legal rights and interests of the innocent citizens''. The writer has some viewpoints about supervision of investigation according to the measures home and abroad，such as the following：First，the rule of evidence should be perfected. The illegal evidence should not be accepted，except extradionary conditions. And then，we must object to be guilty by oneself and leniency to those who confess their crimes. The evidences gained by the prosecuting party and the advocate should discovered. Secondly，the procuratorial organization''s supervision should be perfected. We must ensure the procurator being main status in investigation and restrict the investigative measures. At the same time，the procurator has the disciplinary power against the illegal investigation personnel. Of course，this need an additional condition is that the procurator must highly educated. Thirdly the lawyer''s supervision must be perfected. At first，the criminal must gain the help of lawyer in time；and then，the lawyer has the right to investigate and meet with the criminal suspect, and so on.In my opinion ，the important method to avoid the power being abused is to let the right restrict the power. So did the supervision of investigation. Only thus，would the rule of law be not far away.
索书号 3010663
主题词 侦查权侦查监督
分类号 DF84
论文答辩日期 20010410
论文页码总数 53P
论文页码总数 ref21
文献语种 zh
记录来源 吉林大学
记录流水号 DA200205000060

馆藏信息： 馆藏号 索书号
吉林大学 3010663