公诉权之本质属性论诉讼法专业论文

| 浏览次数:

公诉权之本质属性论诉讼法专业论文

诉权进行科学定义以及对公诉权概念进行语义分析,必须是建立在对公诉权本质

诉权进行科学定义以及对公诉权概念进行语义分析,必须是建立在对公诉权本质 属性的透彻认识以及充分了解使用公诉权概念的具体语境的基础之上,而不能仅 凭主观的想象或推测。目前国内学界对公诉权的本质属性定位主要存在如下观 点:1、行政权说。2、司法权说。3、准司法权说或双重属性说。4、法律监督权 说。以上四种观点基本概括了中外学界对公诉权本质属性定位方面的论争。笔者 认为,对公诉权的应然本质属性重新进行定位,应该本着民主与科学的精神,着 重于对刑事诉讼规律进行富有理性且深入系统地把握,大胆进行理念更新和理论 创新,而不应当让狭隘的部f-j禾lj益人为地遮蔽我们的视野,更要坚决反对并应当 彻底摒弃那种“各为其主式”的歪邪学风。并指出迄今为止的研究成果仍然没有 系统、全面地揭示公诉权的本质属性。

第三部分主要是对公诉权进行追本溯源,从历史的角度分析创设检察官制度 的根本目的,以便为进一步揭示公诉权的本质属性奠定基础。由于各个国家在历 史条件等方面存在差异,公诉制度的产生及制度结构都呈现多样性。本部分重点 考证了大陆法系和英美法系中部分具有典型意义的国家公诉制度形成的历史沿 革和公诉权制度的基本特点,同时对我国公诉制度独特的历史渊源进行了深刻的 剖析,对现行检察制度进行了客观描述,并指出这种制度在严格意义上并不具有 普遍性。

理论研究的目的在于对研究对象作出合理的解释。在诸多解释方法中,功能 解释无疑是一种应用最广泛的且是最为有效的解释方法,它立足于宏观结构与微 观要素的结合分析,能够达到对某一研究对象乃至规律的本质性把握。在第四部 分中,首先对功能分析方法的一般性原理进行了阐释,同时也对功能分析的方法 被广泛应用于法学研究进行了较为充分的论述,对法学界存在的不同观点分别作 了客观介绍。之后,对公诉权功能的概念、公诉权功能的分类、各自的内涵等问 题进行了细致分析。本文首次提出:公诉权既应当具有一般刑事诉讼制度所共同 具有的普遍性功能,同时也应当具有自身的特殊性功能。公诉权所具有的一般功 能主要是指公诉权的规范功能,具体是指公诉权的告知、指引、评价、预测、教 育和强制等规范功能,同时也有必要将公诉权的保护功能和保障功能纳入到公诉 权的一般功能之中;公诉权的特殊功能是指公诉权在刑事司法运作过程中所表现 出来的独特的社会功效和作用,主要是指为了防止国家权力在刑事诉讼中异化,

特别是为了防止法官、警察滥用或怠用审判权、侦查权,通过公诉权与审判权、

侦查权之间相互制衡,严格规范国家权力在刑事诉讼中的运作机制,从而体现刑 事诉讼程序的独立价值,实现刑事诉讼目的。充分认识公诉权的应然法律功能, 一方面能够从整体上准确把握公诉权制度所具有的实然性与应然性特征,有助于 深刻理解这一法律制度赖以存在的价值基础及其立法目标与现实之间的差异 性,为完善刑事诉讼结构提供实证根据;另一方面,对公诉权的法律功能进行深 入分析,无疑是通向公诉权之本质属性理论殿堂的“金钥匙”。

。从人类社会发展的角度分析,所有的社会制度,都是人类为实现一定的目 标,或追求一定的理想而存在的。所以,在本文第五部分中,通过对公诉权制度

产生的时代背景和制度诱因、公诉权赖以存在的价值基础、设立公诉权制度的政

产生的时代背景和制度诱因、公诉权赖以存在的价值基础、设立公诉权制度的政 策、目的等因素的充分把握,必将会有助于我们正确认识公诉权的本质属性。本 文提出,国家权力内部的科学分工,特别是司法权从国家权力体系中独立出来, 并与立法权、行政权分立制衡,是公诉权得以产生和发展的制度基础;司法独立 原则的确立,是公诉权存在的制度保障;控审分离原则的实现,是公诉权得以产 生和发展的直接助因;人类社会厉行民主法治的历史选择,成为公诉权赖以存在 的价值基础。自检察官产生之时,就历史性地担当起了法的守护者的角色,成为 法治社会的主导力量。所以,公诉权的人权保障功能以及维护法治的内在功能, 则直接成为公诉权赖以存在的价值基础。无论是在诸权合一的封建社会形态中, 抑或是在国家权力分离制衡的历史时期,公诉权都具有行政性。

为了进一步深化对公诉权本质属性的研究和便于全面、系统、深刻地认识、 描述公诉权的本质属性,笔者将公诉权的本质属性分解为公诉权的初级本质属性 和二级本质属性两个层次,这是本文的核心部分。在第六部分中,笔者提出,公 诉权内在的初级本质属性应当包括以下几个方面:(1)公诉权具有程序性。(2) 公诉权的求刑性。(3)公诉权的专属性。(4)公诉权的平等性。第七部分着重 探讨了公诉权的二级本质属性,主要包括: (1)公诉权的合法性,主要包含法 定侦查原则和法定控诉原则。 (2)公诉权的合目的性。在这一节中,笔者提出 了衡量公诉权是否滥用的标准,即诉讼条件标准;法院的有罪裁决标准;公诉权 的合理性标准等三个标准。同时对滥用公诉权的四种类型进行了分析:一是无犯 罪嫌疑或犯罪嫌疑不充分而提起公诉。二是应当酌定不起诉或缓予起诉而提起公 诉,包括轻微犯罪起诉、不平等起诉或恶意起诉等。三是在侦查、公诉程序中存 在严重违法现象仍提起公诉。四是该提起公诉而放弃追诉。为了有效地防止检察 官滥用公诉权,各国刑事诉讼法都设立了相应的制约保障机制。这种制约保障机 制主要包括两个方面:一是必须设立公开案件处理的程序,即公开案件处理信 息,向有关人员提供案件处理的信息以保证行使追诉自由裁量权本身的正当性。

 二是必须确立事后审查行使追诉自由裁量权的系统。 (3)公诉权的行政性,并 从五个方面进行了充分论证:其一,从历史上看,公诉权白诞生之时日起,就一 直隶属于国家的行政性权力。其二,检察官的公诉行为特征决定了公诉是典型的 行政行为。其三,从公诉权在刑事诉讼中的表现形式或在国家公共权力体系中的 逻辑结构定位来分析,公诉权的行政性也是十分明显的。另外,行使公诉权的检 察机关在刑事诉讼中普遍承担侦查职能,有些国家甚至直接将检察机关定性为侦 查机关,这是公诉权隶属于行政权的鲜明例证。其四,从检察机关的组织体制和 行动原则来分析,公诉权具有明显的行政性。其五,从检察机关在国家管理体制 中的实际所属关系,则无可置疑地证明了公诉权在本质上的行政性。

在第八部分中,笔者重点批驳了公诉权的司法性观点,并强调了公诉权的非 司法性。本文提出:所谓公诉权具有司法性的观点,是从根本上混淆了公诉权与 司法权的区别,也使国家行政权与司法权的职能划分失去意义。这种观点最大的 危害在于:一方面,它使行政权无限度膨胀,容易造成权力过分集中和失衡,甚

至出现行政权干预立法权、司法权现象;另一方面,它贬抑了司法权独立价值,

至出现行政权干预立法权、司法权现象;另一方面,它贬抑了司法权独立价值, 必将导致司法权在行使方式上的行政化,致使司法权的中立性丧失贻尽,司法权 的权力性能遭到扭曲。所以,所谓行政权的司法化或公诉权的司法性等提法,本 身就是非常不科学的。在本章中,笔者还重点论证了公诉权与司法权之间的本质 区别:其一,司法权具有终结性或称之为终极性;而公诉权只是一种刑罚请求权, 并不具有终极性。其二、司法权具有独立性;而检察机关的行动原则是检察一体 化,上下级之间是典型的上命下从的行政关系,所以公诉权是不应当具备司法权 的独立性特征。其三、司法权具有中立性;而检察官是代表国家和公共利益参与 刑事诉讼的,作为一方当事人,检察官在其面临的各种社会矛盾面前具有鲜明的 倾向性,所以公诉权并不具备这种中立性。其四、司法权具有消极性和被动性; 而公诉权明显具有主动性。其五,司法权具有稳定性;而公诉权在发展与变化的 社会情势中具有应变性。其六,司法权具有审查性;而公诉权往往成为司法审查 的对象。

在本文的最后一部分中,主要是对公诉权与法律监督权的非兼容性以及公诉 权的概念进行了系统分析。笔者认为,公诉权与法律监督权是两种绝然不同质的 权力,相互之间具有非兼容性。国家法律监督权是基于公权而设立的,与国家公 诉权、审判权、立法权等一样,均派生于国家主权。法律监督权的内部构造和运 作机制表现出两个最显著的特征,即其上下性和单向性。显然,法律监督权与刑 事诉讼法律关系中诉讼主体的权利义务相一致的原理是大相径庭的,与任何诉讼 权力或诉讼权利都是完全异质的。而公诉权则是检察官代表国家请求审判机关追 究被告人刑事责任的一种法定诉讼权力,其内部构造和运作机制呈明显的对等性 和双向性。由此可见,法律监督权与公诉权完全是两种不同性质的权力形态,在 法理上根本就不应该存在所谓的包容关系。另外,按照法律监督权的普遍性原 理,在刑事诉讼中,所有诉讼主体的诉讼行为,包括公诉行为,都无一例外地成 为监督对象。而依据所谓法律监督权说,检察官则既是监督主体,又是监督对象, 自己成为自己行为的裁断者,这种情况下,现代法律所体现的程序正义的所有价 值必然荡然无存。另一方面,既然两者是主从、上下的关系,就不能够混为一体。

 基于历史的经验教训,我们不得不关注法律监督权说所存在的两大理论缺陷:其 一,在刑事诉讼过程中,谁来监督监督者?其二,难以防止监督者与被监督者相 互纠合在一起而共同损害其他刑事诉讼主体的利益,更有可能进而危害国家、社 会乃至公众的根本利益。如果将公诉权与法律监督权混为一体来设计刑事诉讼结 构或刑事司法体制,必将弊害重重。

通过本文对公诉权本质属性的系统阐释,公诉权的神秘面纱已经被撩开。所 谓公诉权,一般是指检察官代表国家和公共利益请求审判机关追究被告人刑事责 任的一种法定的诉讼权力,具有规范功能、保护功能、保障功能和限制功能;在 刑事诉讼中,公诉权具有程序性、专属性、求刑性、平等性、合法性、合目的性 和行政性等本质属性,并且与司法权是完全不同质的权力,并不具有司法性,而 与法律监督权彼此更是不能兼容的。这就是法治社会中公诉权的本来面目。无论

4

进行刑事司法体制改革,还是重新构筑我国刑事诉讼结构,抑或从事检察理论研 究,都不应该随意脱离或漠视公诉权应然本质属性的客观要求。

5

AB

AB STRACT OF DOCTORAL DIS SERTATION

ABSTRACT

The 1 5th Conference of the CPC has established the general plan which basically governs the country.¨rule the country by 1aw and construct a socialist country of law¨.It also required a reform of judicial system in order to guarantee that judicial bodies can exercise procuratorial power and adjudicative power independently.The judicial

system reform,an important political affair in China,has attracted the

attention of the whole society.However,it has evoked much controversy

about the value iudgment of the reform.Some suppose that the reform

should involve only some particular parts of the iudicial system within the frame of the present constitution.The others insist that the reform be revolutionary and the constitution can be overstepped.With regard to the reform of the procuratorial system,the academia and judicial organs are puzzled by the indefinite constitutional position of procuratorates and

backward procuratorial theory research.Obviously.owing to its limitations,the existing research achievements can not provide a systematic,theoretical guide for the{udicial reform.Under this background.I chose Study of the Essence of the Power of Public

Prosecution........Interpreting the Principles of the Power of Public Prosecution in a legal society as the title of my doctoral dissertation.In the paper,I have given a systematic interpretation on principles of the

public prosecution power from Marxist philosophic,sociological and

juristic point of view.I hope it can be benefit of improving the criminal

proceeding structure and criminal justice system. The paper consists of 9 parts that are as follows:

Part 1.Philosophic examination on the essence of the public prosecution power.

Part 2.Comments on varied theories and semantic analysis of public

prosecution power.

Part 3.Historical background of public prosecution power. PaIrt 4.Functions of public prosecution power.

Part 5.Value foundation of the public prosecution power.

Part 6.The first—class essence of public prosecution power. Part 7.The second—class essence of public prosecution power.

Part 8.Non—judicial characteristics of public prosecution power.

6

Part

Part 9.Conflict between public prosecution power and legal

supervision power.

In order to probe the essence of public prosecution power,I explain its Philosophic connotation at first,Then point out that essentialism philosophy is still the base of Marxism epistemology.Then the method to find out the essence, .essence restoring method i S i ntroduced

a scientific way to recognize deeply the essence of public prosecution power.At 1ast.I make clear the philosophic connotation and value obj ect discussed in this paper,which provide a necessary, theoretical premise for renewal of criminal proceeding structure and Judicial reform.

The semantic analysis method,the semantic analysis of the definition of public prosecution power and the location of the essence are introduced and evaluated in Part 2.I believe that Marxist jurisprudence iS an open one that has never refused to absorb any valuable cultural achievements.It iS significant and necessary to use semantic analysis method in 1aw research under the guide of Marxist philosophy.Owing to neglect of semantic analysis method,great disagreement exists about the essence of public prosecution power.I suppose that the semantic analysis method should be the primary method in 1aw study.Especially.it i S necessary to locate scientifically the definition of public prosecution power SO that a prerequisite can be provided to expound much more deeply the essence of public prosecution power.There are about 5 varied theories on the definition of public prosecution power.Great progress in

this area has been made in Taiwan and Japan.I believe the scientific definition and semantic analysis on public prosecution power can not be established until the particular linguistic background in which the definition of public prosecution power iS used has been grasped.It never relies on subjective imagine and guess without good grounds.The main viewpoints on the essence of public prosecution power are as follows:the public prosecution power iS(1)an administrative power(2)a iudicial power(3)a para-judicial power(4)a legal supervision power.The 4 viewpoints above cover the main controversy on location of public prosecution power in China and overseas.I believe the process of the relocation of public prosecution power should be democratic,scientific, and based on the systematic and deep understanding on criminal procedure regularities.It needs renewing boldly the traditional concept and theory.The viewpoints to stand only on his own organization’S

7

interests

interests and self-egoist study styles should be abandoned.Because of varied reasons,the essence of public prosecution power has not been expounded systematically and comprehensively。

The system of public prosecution power and the 1eading aim to establish prosecutors system are introduced in part 3.which can lay a solid foundation for finding out the essence of public prosecution power. Because of the historical and other differences between varied countries, the emerge process of public prosecution system and the structure of the system demonstrate diverse.In this part,I briefly introduce main,basic characteristics of the public prosecution power and forming history of some typical public prosecution systems in common 1aw system and continentallaw system countries.including China who possesses a special historical origin.The present prosecution system in China iS also described in this part.However,speaking strictly,Chinese system is not

UnlVerSe.

The aim of theoretical research iS to give a reasonable explanation on research obj ects.Among many explanation methods,functional explanation method iS undoubtedly.most effective and widely—used.It aims to make an analysis to obiects macroscopicallv and microcosmically, and therefore can reach the essence and regularities of obiects.Part 4 consists of an explanation on the general principles,wide use in legal study and an obi ective introduction.of varied viewpoints of functional analysis method.The details on definition,classification and respective connotation of public prosecution function are also included in this part. It iS first time to point out that the public prosecution power should share the common functions owned by other criminal iustice system as well as the special and unique function.The former includes the functions of informing,guide,judge,prediction,education and compelling,protection and security.The latter indicates the unique social function that the public prosecution power demonstrates in the operation of criminal justice system.It aims to avoid alienation of state power,especially

prevent judges,polices and prosecutors from abusing their power,keep

the balance between public prosecution power,investigation power and trial power,limit the use of state power in criminal{ustice,achieve the independent value of criminal procedure and reach its obj ective.On the one hand,the full understanding of due function of public prosecution power iS bene行cial to recognize the value foundation of the system and the distinction between 1egalization obj ect and law operation SO that the

facts

facts can be provided for improving the criminal procedural structure.On the other hand,the deep analysis on function of public prosecution power is the”gold key¨to find out the theory on essence of public prosecution Power.

With respect to human society development,the reason that all the social systems are to realize an obj ect or pursue an ideal.The essence of public prosecution power is interpreted in Part 5 through introduction of the original background and systematic base,value,establishment policy

and aim ofpublic prosecution power,and etc.It is insisted that scientific

power distribution in a state,especially independent iudicial power from state power and keeping bala.nce with legalization power and administrative power,iS the system foundation that public prosecution power can form and develop further.The establishment of judicial

Independence principles,a system guarantee.The separation of prosecution power and trial power,the direct reason of form and development.The people’S historical choice of democracy and 1aw country,the value foundation.Prosecutors play the role of Iaw safeguard and are the leading strength since they emerge.Therefore,the inner function of protecting human rights and keeping the law and order is the direct foundation of value that public prosecution power exists. Regardless of the all—law—in.one superstitious social system or the power. balance times,public prosecution power possesses administrative features

In order to study further,recognize and describe comprehensively, systematically and deeply the essence of public prosecution power.it iS classified 2 classes,the first.class essence and the second。class essence

、in this part which is the main body of the paper.In this part,the inner first’class essence includes the following aspects:(1)the procedural characteristic of public prosecution power(2)the panel characteristic of public prosecution power(3)the exclusive characteristic of public prosecution power(4)the equal characteristic.

The second—class essence of public prosecution power iS expounded in this part.It mainly consists of 2 aspects:(1)legality of public prosecution power(2)aim—oriented characteristic of public prosecution power.In Section(2)a criteria to judge whether the public prosecution power 1S abused iS put forward,which include 3 elements,suitcase terms. guilt conviction and ration of public prosecution power.The 4 types of abusing public prosecution power discussed in this section are as

9

follows:A.Bring

follows:

A.Bring a public prosec.ution in the case that no evidence can

versify1 the accused iS the suspected or the evidence iS insufficient

t3。13ring pUOllC prosecution in the case that the suspected should

a

not be accused or should be given a suspend.accuse including accuse of

misdemeanor,unequal accuse and evil accuse and etc.

C.Bring a public prosecution in the case that the process of investigation and PubliC proSecution break law seriouslv D.Abandon prosecution in the case that the suspect should be

accused.

The corresponding restrict mechanism has been established in many countries in order to prevent the prosecutors’abuse of public prosecution power,The mechanism mainly consists of 2 elements.At first,the process of dealing with criminal cases has to be public,that is to say, make the information concerning about the case known to those involving in the case.Secondly,a subsequent examination system to the execution of discretion in public prosecution system has to be established. (3)Administrative characteristics.It iS expounded in 5 aspects.At first. public prosecution power has been attached to the state administrative power since it emerged.Secondly,the features of public prosecution power indicate obviously that it iS a kind of typical administrative power.

Thirdly,public prosecution power possesses apparently the features of administrative power from the view of expression style in the criminal procedure and its position in national public power system.In general, procuratorates undertake the function of investigation,and in some countries,they are designated organization.It iS the obvious example. Furthermore,it can be seen that public prosecution power possesses obvious administrative feature from the organization structure and operative principles of procuratorates.Finally,it is verified clearly that public prosecution power iS essentially an kind of administrative power. In the eighth part.the author focuses on criticizing the standpoint of

the judicial nature of the Power of Public Prosecution and emphasizes that the Power of Public Prosecution does not own the iudicial nature. The thesis presents that the doctrine of iudicial nature of the Power of Public Prosecution confuses difference of the Power of Public Prosecution and Judicial powers while it means that it iS meaningless to divide functions of administrative powers and iudicial powers.The

doctrine of judicial nature of the Power of Public Prosecution has many

10

negative

negative effects.On one hand.it enlarges the administrative powers indefinitely and causes over—convergence and out.of-balance of the power easily.Furthermore,the administrative powers put much effect on the 1egislative power and judicial powers sometimes.On the other hand, it decreases the independent value of judicial powers and surely leads to the iudicial powers fuU of the administraive character;therefore,it results in the losing of the neutralization of iudicial powers totally;it reverses the essence of judicial powers.Therefore,the standpoint such as iudicialization of administrative powers or iudicial nature of the Power of Public Prosecution are unscientific basically.In this chapter,the author puts emphasis on essential difference of the Power of Public Prosecution and iudicial powers as following.First,the terminaliS one of the features of iudicial powers while the Power of Public Prosecution is one power of penalty requestment and then has no terminal.Second.independence iS one of the features of iudicial powers;the principle of procuratorial organs’action is a procuratorial organic whole and the relationship between leaders and subordinates are the administrative obedience

typically.So the Power of Public Prosecution should not have the independence of judicial powers.Third,judicial power is neutral;the Power of Public Prosecution is not neutral while the procurator iS on behalf of state and the public interest as one part who takes part in the criminal procedure.Fourth,judicial power iS passive while the Power of Public Prosecution is initiative.FifHl,{udicial power iS stable while the Power of Public Prosecution iS modified according to the development of the society.Sixth,investigation iS one of the features of{udicial powers while the Power of Public Prosecution iS one of the objects of iudicial

investigation usually.

In the last part.the thesis mainly analyses the non.compatibility between the Power of Public Prosecution and the Power of Legal Supervision,and also explain the idea of the Power of Public Prosecution in a systematic way.I think the Power of Public Prosecution is not identical with the Power of Lenal Supervision in essence and they are not compatible.The Power of Legal Supervision iS established on account of the Public Power and also derived from the national sovereignty,which

iS the same to the Power of Public Prosecution.the Judicial Authority

and the Legislative Power,etc.The internal structure and the working mechanism of the Power of Legal Supervision show two marked features:up and down character.one—way nature.It iS clear that the Power

of

of Legal Supervision is widely divergent from the principle that the right iS consistent with the dutv to the subi ect of the 1egal relationship of the criminal procedure and also from any power or right of lawsuit in nature.But the Power of Public Prosecution iS one 1egal procedural power for the public procurator in the name of state to request the judge to find out the criminal responsibility of the accused and the internal structure and the working mechanism of the Power of Public Prosecution

obviously show reciprocity character and two—Way nature.So the Power of Public Prosecution and the Power of Legal Supervision are different powers in nature and there are no compatible relations between them in the view of the legal principle.Besides,according to universality of The Power of Legal Supervision.all the procedural action fro

【公诉权之本质属性论诉讼法专业论文】相关推荐

工作总结最新推荐

NEW
  • 大学的入党申请书一尊敬的党组织:我只是一名平凡的大学生,但我有着不平凡的人生理想。在我心中,中国共产

  • 住建局述职报告范文1各位领导、各位委员代表、同志们:大家好!受组织安排,我于2020年10月调任市住

  • 基本信息个人相片姓名:性别:女民族:汉族出生年月:1992年7月24日证件号码:婚姻状况:

  • 一、高度重视,加强领导学校自接到上级有关文件后,政教处组织全体教师认真学习文件精神,确定了5月10日

  • 尊敬的团支部:我志愿加入中国共产主义青年团。通过对中国共青团的知识的学习,我对团组织的认识又加

  • 尊敬的团组织:我自愿加入中国共产主义青年团。中国共产主义青年团是一个先进的组织,是广大青年在实

  • 金融工程专业个人简历模板个人基本简历姓名: -国籍: 中国目前所在地: 广州民族: 汉族户口所在地:

  • 设备经理个人简历模板姓名:目前所在: 中山 年龄: 39户口所在: 湖南 国籍: 中国婚姻状况: 未

  • 参赛选手的个人简历模板姓名:性别:女年龄:19系别:信息技术系班级:出生年月:籍贯:浙江居住地:毕业

  • 相关阅读面试有哪些必须知道学问?一、仪态和精神面貌是基础面试的时候你不一定要穿得非常正式,这一点视公