刑事诉讼法中的侦查概括条款
艾明刑事诉讼法中的侦查概括条款
General Provision on Investigation in Criminal Procedure Law
期刊名称：《法学研究》
期刊年份：
作者：艾明
单位：西南政法大学
中文关键词：侦查概括条款;特别授权条款;法律保留原则;侦查程序自由形成原则
英文关键词：general provision on investigation;special authorization provision;the principle of legal reservation;the principle of free formation of investigation procedure
中文摘要：
大陆法系国家和地区普遍规定了侦查概括条款，规定这一条款的重要原因是兼顾法律保留原则和侦查程序自由形成原则。从性质而言，侦查概括条款既是任务分配规范，也是一般授权规范。因此，侦查概括条款不仅具有抽象的任务指示功能，还有具体的措施授权功能，但这一授权功能仅处于补遗地位。与大陆法系法治发达国家相比，我国的侦查概括条款存在着任务指示功能明显，措施授权功能不彰；侦查概括条款和证据收集概括条款并列规定，内容重复；特别授权条款的数量和规范密度不足，难以保障侦查概括条款的明确性等问题。我国立法机关应当正视上述问题，在借鉴其他国家侦查措施立法经验的基础上，进一步完善侦查程序立法。
英文摘要：
The establishment of a general provision on investigation in criminal procedure law is considered to be a common practice among civil law countries and regions. One of the significant considerations is to take into account both the legal reservation principle and the free formation principle of investigation procedure at the same time. By nature, the general provision on investigation is as much a task assignment provision as a general authorization provision. Consequently, it has both the function of abstract task instruction and the function of concrete measure-authorization, although the latter is only in a supplementary position. Compared to that of other civil law countries, the implementation of the general provision on investigation in China appears to be problematic in three different aspects, namely over-emphasizing the task-indication function while ignoring the measure-authorization function, overlapping between the general provision on investigation and the general provision on evidence collection, and the inability to ensure the definiteness of the general provision on investigation as a result of insufficient quantity and density of special authorization provision. To further perfect the legislation on investigation procedure, Chinese legislators should draw on the legislative experiences of other countries.
全文阅读： 点击下载
