【作者】 陈士果；

【导师】 胡常龙；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 法律， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 我国《宪法修正案》第二十四条明确规定:国家尊重和保障人权。这表明,保障人权已经成为国家的基本义务,任何一项国家权力都不得侵犯人权并应以保障和推动人权为目的,侦查权也不例外。侦查权的基本职能是控制犯罪和保障人权,控制犯罪的根本目的在于保障人权,所谓“权力的理性在于确保权利”说的就是这一点。如果侦查权行使中抛弃或忽视人权保障,片面强调控制犯罪,侦查权的行使就会迷失方向,就会成为一柄失去控制的双刃剑,随时可能伤及无辜。侦查权运行的正当性,实质在于寻求控制犯罪与保障人权的最佳平衡点。我国职权主义侦查模式在控制犯罪方面具有明显优势,但其人权保障功能相对弱化。如何坚持有效控制犯罪的同时,加强、完善侦查权的保障人权职能,这是我国侦查权运行正当性、合理性、和谐性的关键。本文围绕侦查权的保障人权职能,从五个方面进行了具体阐述:第一章从侦查权的性质入手,提出并论证了侦查权是具有行政化倾向的司法权的观点,并进而探讨了依照司法规律推进侦查制度改革的基本思路。第二章从法学理论、刑诉立法、侦查实践、国际形势四个方面,论证了加强侦查权保障人权职能的必要性。第三章关于人权保障维度下的侦查模式比较研究,探讨了世界主要法治国家职权主义侦查模式、当事人主义侦查模式的特点,并对其人权保障功能进行了具体分析。第四章在对我国职权主义侦查模式优缺点做出一分为二的评价基础上,重点揭示了我国侦查阶段人权保障方面存在的四个方面的问题:刑讯逼供问题;超期羁押问题;律师介入难问题;侦查机关不作为问题。第五章提出了完善侦查权保障人权职能的具体构想:首先,应当确立侦查法治原则,即强制侦查法定原则、比例原则、司法审查原则;其次,以程序规范侦查,通过完善具体侦查程序,构建侦查权规范化运行机制;最后,以权力(权利)制约侦查,建立健全侦查权制衡制度,主要包括检察监督侦查制度、审判规范侦查制度、辩护制约侦查制度、公安内部监督制度。更多还原

【Abstract】 Human rights are respected and protected according to China’s Amendments to the Constitution of the PRC code 24. This statement clearly shows that protecting the human rights has become the basic responsibility of the state. Any state power may not violate human rights. Instead, such power should be exercised in the way to protect and promote human rights. Among these powers is the investigative power without exception. The basic functionality of investigative power is to control crime and to protect human rights. The primary purpose of crime control is to protect human rights, which is also referred to by "The rationality of power lies in its rights protection". If the human rights are ignored or abandoned in the process of exercising investigative power, and crime control is inappropriately emphasized, the practice of investigative power will lose its direction. In that case, it will become a double-edged sword without control, which may hurt innocent people at any time. The validity of exercising investigate power seeks the optimal balance between crime control and human rights protection. In China, although the doctrine investigation mode has obvious advantages in the crime control, it has relatively weak protection for human rights. How to control crime effectively while strengthening and improving the human rights protection functionality of investigative power become the keys to the validity, rationality and harmony of exercising investigative power. In this thesis the human rights protection functionality of investigative power are discussed in detail, as shown in the following five chapters. Chapter 1 begins with the characteristics of investigative power, followed by bringing up and demonstrating the idea that investigative power is one judicial power having the administrative tendency. Further discussion in carrying out the investigative system reform according to the judicial rule is also presented. Chapter 2 demonstrates the necessities of strengthening the protective functionality of investigative power to the human rights in four aspects of law theories, litigation laws, investigative practices and international situations. Chapter 3 comparatively studies the investigation modes within the human rights protection dimension, discusses the main characteristics of the doctrine investigation mode and litigant investigation mode practiced in the major jural countries in the world and provides specific analysis to the functionalities of human rights protection. Chapter 4 objectively evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of China’s doctrine investigation mode. Based on the evaluations, four major problems regarding the human rights protection during the investigation process are identified and emphasized, which include obtaining testimony by torturing, overtime detaining, difficulty of lawyer involvement, dereliction of the investigation authority. Chapter 5 gives some specific suggestions on making improvement of the investigative power and human rights protection. Firstly, the rule that investigative power be governed by law should be established, which ensures the principle of mandatory legal investigation, the principle of proportion, and the principle of judicial review. Secondly, investigation should be specified by the procedure. By improving the specific investigation procedure, the standardized investigative power system should be setup. Finally, the power and/or rights restriction system should be used to restrict investigation. The investigative power restriction systems including inspection and supervision system, trial and standardization system, defense and restriction system and internal self-inspection system should be established and improved.更多还原