被追诉人程序参与权研究

【作者】 蒋薇；

【导师】 李建明；

【作者基本信息】 南京师范大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2013， 博士

【摘要】 刑事诉讼的中心任务主要是解决被追诉人的“定罪”、“量刑”问题,因而,诉讼程序的进行始终与被追诉人切身利益息息相关。按照正当程序理论的基本要求,裁判主体在作出与某一主体利益相关的决策时,必须给予其相应的陈述、申辩等实质参与程序的机会,并使该参与意见能够对决策产生富有意义的影响。被追诉人作为诉讼主体,面对有可能使自己受到刑事处罚等不利影响的司法裁判时,理应享有实质参与作出该裁判的司法程序的基本权利,即彰显与确证被追诉人主体地位的一系列程序参与权,如知悉权、在场权、辩护权及救济权等。对程序参与权的真实享有,意味着被追诉人不仅要获得参与程序的机会,更应具备实质参与程序的能力,并使这种参与能够对程序进行及决策的作出产生实际作用力。从程序参与权的价值来看,保障被追诉人享有程序参与权,不仅能使被追诉人的道德主体性得到充分认可,以夯实程序合法正当性的内在基础,而且也能促进实体公正的实现,以提升被追诉人再社会化改造的实际效果。因而,建构完善的被追诉人程序参与权体系已是刑事诉讼民主化、法治化改革中不可或缺的重要组成部分。纵观国外立法可以发现,当今世界主要国家及国际立法基本都认可被追诉人基于自身应有的主体地位而享有一系列程序参与权,有的国家甚至已经将部分程序参与权上升到了宪法保护的层面。在我国,随着人权、民主意识的提升,立法也日益注重被追诉人对程序参与权的真实享有,并在历次修法中对之加以完善。然而,受传统法文化的深层次影响、诉讼价值选择的偏颇、强职权主义模式的渗透,外部法制环境的欠缺等因素的综合影响,现如今,我国立法对被追诉人主体性认可还不彻底,程序非诉讼化构造的缺陷致使被追诉人还难以获得充分的程序参与机会,权利内容的不全面导致被追诉人程序参与能力还不是很强,以致“参与”对司法裁判作出的影响力极为有限,在整个刑事司法过程中,被追诉人程序参与权虚化现象较为严重。这些现实缺陷直接影响了诉讼程序内在独立价值的正常发挥。基于此,本文在综合比较国内外历史文化、社会政治、立法环境、司法实践等现实因素的基础上,有针对性地提出了一些保障我国被追诉人程序参与权有效实现的改革设想,当然这种理想化建构不仅需要培育社会民众对主体性的普遍认知,纠正司法人员片面的司法本质观、权利观、程序价值观,而且也需深化社会政治、司法体制改革,构建职能区分合理的诉讼程序结构,优化诉讼模式,以增强被追诉人权利为立足点,充实并细化知悉权、辩护权、救济权等各项权利内容。只有这样,被追诉人才能真正作为诉讼主体真实享有各项程序参与权,并积极、主动、自主地参与到程序中,以使刑事司法程序获得应有的正当性与合理性,从而推动刑事诉讼民主化与文明化的有效实现。更多还原

【Abstract】 As the core task of criminal procedure is to solve the problem of the conviction and sentencing of the accused, the whole criminal procedure is closely bound up with the interests of the accused. According to the basic requirement of the due procedure theory, such opportunities of substantively participating the procedure as statement and defense should be given to the interested person when making a decision. Moreover, the opinions of the interested persons shall make great impact on the decision. As a subject of the lawsuit, in which the accused may be subject to criminal punishment, the accused shall have the basic procedural rights which can reflect subjective position of them, such as the right to know, the right of presence, the right of defense and the right of relief. To really enjoy the rights of procedural participation means that the accused shall not only have the opportunity, but also have the ability of substantively participating, which can actively influences the procedure and the decision. In light of the value function of the right of procedural participation, giving the right of procedural participation to the accused can not only tamp the intrinsic foundation of the due procedure by fully approving the moral subjectivity of the accused, but also improve the actual effect of the re-socialization reformation of the accused by the realization of substantial justice. Thus, it is the indispensable competent in the democratic and legal reformation of criminal procedure to construct a perfect procedural participation system of the accused.In foreign legislation, the majority of countries and international legislation recognize the right of procedural participation of the accused on account of the subjective position. What’s more, this right is improved to be protected by constitution in some countries. With the awareness of human rights and democracy, legislation in our country pays more and more attention to the real enjoying of the right of procedural participation of the accused, and optimizes it through revising laws. However, as the result of such factors as the deep influence of the traditional culture, the biased choice of lawsuit value, the infiltration of power doctrine, and the lack of legislative external environment, the subjective position of the accused has still not be thoroughly recognized in the legislation of our country, the accused can not get the full opportunity of procedural participation due to the defect of the procedure structure, and the impact of participation on the judicial adjudication is limited for the incompetence of the accused with incomplete right. All of the above stated prevent the value function of the judicial procedure working properly. Therefore, this thesis puts forward the means of reformation to enhance the right of procedural participation of the accused on the basis of the analysis on such factors as historical culture, social politics, legislative environment and judicial practice at home and abroad. Besides the recognition of the subjectivity of the accused by the social populace to correct the vicarious views of essence, right and procedural value, the ideal construction this thesis proposes needs to deepen the reformation of social politics and judicial system, and build a litigation structure with rational division of functions to optimize litigation mode, which enhances the right of the accused and improve the right to know, right of defense, right of relief and so on. In this way, the accused can enjoy the right of procedural participation, with which the accused can participate in the procedure positively, actively, independently. Thus, the democratization and civilization of criminal procedure can be realized effectively as the criminal procedure acquires its legitimacy rationality.更多还原