我国刑事诉讼运行状况实证分析

徐美君

我国刑事诉讼运行状况实证分析

An Empirical Study on Operation of Chinese Criminal Procedure Law


    期刊名称:《法学研究》
    期刊年份:
    作者:徐美君
    单位:复旦大学法学院
    中文关键词:刑事诉讼;侦查决定型;实证分析
    英文关键词:criminal procedure;“investigation-center” mode;empirical study
    中文摘要:
    通过对1997年至2007年《中国法律年鉴》记载的数据以及中国东部某基层公安司法机关实际运行刑事诉讼法的相关数据进行分析,可以得出初步的结论:我国的刑事诉讼是一种“侦查决定型”刑事诉讼,侦查机关在侦查终结时所作的决定更是关乎整个刑事案件诉讼结果的命运节点。据此,迄今为止进行的着重于审判程序改革的刑事诉讼改革进路值得反思,未来的刑事诉讼改革应当以解决侦查终结时侦查权的有效监督问题为重点。
    英文摘要:
    Based on data collected from China Law Year Book and practice in one district in east of China from 1997 to 2007, this paper conducts an empirical study on the operation of current Chinese Criminal Procedural Law. Although there are some variations, the data from the district demonstrates all the characteristics demonstrated by China Law Year Book, that is, very low rate of non-prosecution and non-guilty decision, low percentage of defendant appeal and high rate of affirmation of original judgment in second instance trial and trial supervision procedure, which strengthens the conclusion that Chinese criminal process is decided by criminal investigation.A process decided by investigation procedure means once a case is transferred by the investigative organ to be reviewed and prosecuted, it is very likely to be convicted. Most of the first instance trial just reviews and verifies the evidence collected in the investigation procedure. Such process is different from the “trial-center” criminal procedure of western countries. Such process has some advantages, such as encouraging investigative organs to find out the truth of the case by all means and to screen out most of the suspects in the early stage of criminal process to save procedural resources and make suspects get rid of criminal proceedings earlier. However, it does have some disadvantages. It makes investigative organs under great pressures to collect guilty evidence, which would infringe the human rights of the suspects. Moreover, it also makes the public trial a “rubber stamp” to the investigation procedure and cannot revise errors made in investigation.Current judicial reform chooses trail procedure as the breakthrough, and the investigation procedure seems quiet by comparison. This approach of reform is wrong. To be successful in criminal judicial reform, we must start from investigation procedure. The reform of investigation procedure is too ambitious a topic for this paper to look into. But the decision made by the investigative organ at the end of the investigation is the turning point of criminal proceeding. Establishing effective supervision of this turning point is the key to Chinese criminal process.
    全文阅读:  点击下载

相关文章!
  • 李步云、张秋航:驳反宪政的错误

    一段时间以来,有些人公开或不公开的反对宪政,并错误影响到决策部门。我们要实现法治,就要毫不含糊地坚持宪政理论和原则。宪政是个科学

  • 王一超:论“告诉才处理”案件的

    “绝对自诉主义”未关注国家与个人诉权之间的平衡,将对“告诉才处理”案件的追诉错误地理解为是被害人的私事。在司法实践中,这种理解不仅

  • 马岭:宪法权利与法律权利:区别

    宪法权利的主体是整体性的个人,法律权利的主体是个体化的个人或部分个人的集合体(法人)。某一公民可以放弃自己的法律权利,但人民不