滥用公诉权的司法审查机制研究

【作者】 刘磊；

【导师】 谢佑平；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 国际法学， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 公诉权包括提起追诉、实行公诉、变更与撤回公诉等权能,不受制约的公诉权只能是促成“检察官司法”的形成。对滥用公诉权进行司法审查既是欧美社会通行的立法例,也是国际公约中人权保障条款在国内法上的具体落实。权力分立制衡、人权保障、起诉法定原则是欧陆法国家刑事司法法治化的基础,公诉权的配置与运行必须遵守与上述基础原则相符合。检察官在刑事司法中滥用公诉权主要有以下表现:一是存在足够的犯罪嫌疑而不予追诉,进而损害法律秩序的安定与加剧社会冲突的产生;二是不存在充分的犯罪嫌疑而提起公诉,检察官怠于履行举证责任而滥行追诉刑事被告;三是正式的庭审中公诉方任意要求变更公诉与撤回公诉,既损害程序的安定性,也侵害刑事被告正当的诉讼权利。我国目前的司法体制虽与欧美诸国存在着根本的不同,但我国既然已签署或加入很多国际公约,那么我国的国内法就必须与国际人权标准相适应。众所周知,刑事诉讼法是“宪法的测震仪”。合理地在刑事司法中建构起相应的权力制衡机制,由法院对公诉权的行使进行适当必要的外部审查,既能有助于防范检察官滥用之能事,又能保障受追诉人的救济权利。目前建构公诉审查机制存在一定障碍,因为我国的文化传统、司法体制与欧美社会存在差异。但是,由法院对公诉权进行若干制衡既有利于保障人权也有利于检察机关自身角色的转变,所以适当引入司法审查机制具有一定可行性。在制约检察官不起诉裁量权的问题上,吸收德国强制起诉程序的合理内核,赋予受害人适当的强制起诉的申请权,可以使法院在个案中制衡检察官的不当不起诉。同时,通过建构起由民间法律人士组成的“检察审查会”来监督检察官不起诉裁量权是否正确。在我国未来的庭前程序改革中,如果能够建构起专门的中间程序,则可以使法院庭前的公诉审查将检察官无证据起诉的案件“过滤”。当正式的庭审启动后,检察官如果申请变更公诉,人民法院应当区分是否属“公诉事实同一性”,超出公诉事实同一性的公诉变更属“新诉”,除追加被告等少数情形外,法院不得审理未经合法起诉的“新诉”。如果公诉方提出变更公诉,法院必须告知刑事被告相应的不利后果。如果检察官要求撤回公诉,法院要视刑事被告的程序利益而裁定是否允许。如果检察官以证据不足为由要求撤回公诉,由于案件已经经过庭前中间程序的公诉审查阶段,人民法院应当驳回。人民检察院撤回公诉后,不得基于同一被告、同一事实再行起诉。在我国未来的刑事司法改革中,检察官王国或法官王国之所以不正确是因为欠缺必要的分权制衡机制。更多还原

【Abstract】 The power of public-prosecuting is consisted of different contents, such as prosecuting against suspect,acting as government’ s accuser in court,changing or withdrawing litigation in court.The kingdom of prosecutor may come forth if without other powers’ restricting.Judicial review on the power of public-prosecuting is legislative in western countries and can protect human rights in domestic legislation according to international treaties.Principles of ’separation of powers’, ’guarantee human rights’ and ’legality in prosecuting’ are foundations of criminal justice in European countries,so we must obey such principles if we want to reform and change our system of public-prosecuting.If a prosecutor abuses his power,he may intently quit accusation against defendant even when holding all kinds of criminal evidence or prosecute a defendant without evidence,and he may change and withdraw criminal bills in trial in order to re-prosecute subsequently. Such acts will damage the justice and make the defendant injured in criminal procedure.Although our judicial systems are different from western countries,the standard in human rights in international treaties which have been subscribed or created must be obeyed.As it is known, criminal justice is just as seismograph of Constitution.If he court review prosecutors’ decisions in the idea of judicial activism, prosecutors’ wrong acts may be corrected by pretrial court and the defendant’ s relieve rights are justified by this way.There exist some obstacles in the way of constructing system of judicial review on public-prosecution because traditional cultures and judicial system in China are different of western society.Since judicial review on prosecutors’ decisions do benefit to protect human rights and make the prosecutors rethink their roles in criminal justice,it is feasible to review the power of public-prosecute by courts.As to the power of non-prosecute,the prosecutor may be compelled to prosecute if victim appeal,which limit the prosecutors’ power.At the same time,a committee consisted of all kinds of lawyers have the right to review the power of non-prosecute.In Chinese future criminal justice reform,if procedure of "Zwischenverfahren" can be established in order to make the pretrial-judge review the decision of prosecuting,criminal cases without sufficient evidence may be cancelled by pretrial judge.In formal trial, if the criminal plaintiff asks to change or withdraw the criminal bills, the judge must know the meanings of "same offense" If the prosecutor put forward a new suit,the court must consider the defendants’ rights. It must be obeyed that a case without party cannot by trialed.If the prosecutor want to add new defendant or new crime,the court cannot proceed without protect the defendant’ s understanding of possible disadvantage. Withdrawing lawsuit in trial must be reviewed by the court because defendants have all kinds of benefit in criminal procedure.In trial, prosecutor finds that evidence is not sustained defendant’ s crime and ask to withdrawing lawsuit,the court will reversal his appeals because the prosecuting has been reviewed in pretrial procedure.After the reversal,prosecuting attorney cannot re-prosecute the same defendant in the same offense.Kingdom of judge and prosecutor are all incorrect in our future judicial reform because power of separation is not exist in justice procedure.更多还原