【作者】 张家国；

【导师】 刘绍彬；

【作者基本信息】 兰州大学 ， 法律， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 本文是从刑讯逼供的含义、原因、危害和对策四个方面展开论述的。对于刑讯逼供的含义,文章简略地分析了刑讯逼供的基本的法律要素,在此过程中,重点强调了两个问题。其一,刑讯逼供的主体不仅包括司法工作人员即“正常主体”,而且包括一些“非正常主体”即非司法工作人员,如个别治安联防队员、狱霸牢头等。其二、刑讯逼供不仅存在于刑事侦查环节,同时也存在于治安处罚环节,其中在留置盘问中表现较为突出。对此,文章专列一节论述。对于刑讯逼供的原因,文章从刑讯逼供的主观原因和客观原因进行论述。重点论证了刑讯逼供者的主观目的和侦查讯问的“过分”秘密化。在此过程中,对刑讯逼供的其他原因进行了较为简略的穿插论述。其一、刑讯逼供者的主观目的,可分为为公刑讯与为私刑讯,对于这一重要问题,特别是为私刑讯问题,经常得不到应有的重视甚至容易被忽略。如果说为公刑讯是认识局限的话,为私刑讯则意味着“权力寻租”,而不仅仅是侵犯人权。其二、侦查讯问程序的“过分”秘密化是刑讯逼供最重要的客观原因。在这种状况下,即使发生了刑讯逼供,相关证据的收集和固定也无法实现。对于刑讯逼供的危害,文章采取先综合后具体的论述方法。首先,从刑讯逼供者的目的开始,逐步分析,指出刑讯逼供不但不利于打击犯罪,而且会制造新的犯罪甚至会放纵犯罪,更不利于保障人权,从而进一步破坏法律的权威。其次,将刑讯逼供与其他反映强烈的问题,加以具体比较。指出:在刑事实体法方面,刑讯逼供逼供与贪污受贿相比,后者的危害甚于前者;在刑事诉讼法方面,刑讯逼供与超期羁押、律师权益的过分限制等问题相比较,其危害更大。关于刑讯逼供的对策,文章采用了先反后正的论述方法。首先,对一些遏制刑讯逼供且较为流行的对策,进行一定地反思,如沉默权、举证责任倒置原则、非法证据排除规则等,在我国具体的法律环境中,它们可能存在局限性和非可行性。其次,提出可能有效的措施,包括侦押分离制度、讯问见证人制度、身体检查权制度等,并同时强调对其进行必要的改造或程序设置。例如侦押分离制度,不仅要把看守所与公安机关分离,而且要把行政拘留所、强制戒毒所等所有的隶属于公安机关的羁押机构,交给司法行政机关主管,而不能交给法院或检察院管辖。同样,对讯问见证人制度、证人作证制度等对策进行了相应的论述。更多还原

【Abstract】 This article is from the meaning of extorting confessions by torture,the reasons for,the harm and countermeasures launched discussed.In the meaning of extorting confessions by torture,the article provides a brief analysis of extorting confessions by torture,the basic legal elements,in this process,with emphasis On the two issues.First,the extortion of confessions by torture includes not only members of the judiciary that is the main normal,but also including some non-normal main non-judicial personnel,such as individual members of joint defense of law and order,such as prison Laotou Pa.Second,extorting confessions by torture not only exists in the part of the criminal investigation,but also exist in law and order only penalties links,which exist more prominent performance in Lien and Interrogation,this article on a special train.For the reasons for the extortion of confessions by torture,extortion of confessions by torture article from the subjective and objective reasons for the cause of exposition.Proved to focus on the subjective purpose of extorting confessions by torture and interrogation of the investigation "excessive" of the secret.During this process,the extortion of confessions of the other reasons for a relatively brief interludes in the exposition.First,the subjective purpose of extorting confessions by torture,can be divided into a public lynching-for the torture and, for this important issue,especially for the lynching-and often not given due attention or even easily overlooked.If we say that torture is for the public understanding of the limitations of words,it means that for the lynching-"power rent-seeking" and not just violations of human rights.Second,the investigation of interrogation procedures "over" secret of extorting confessions by torture is the most important objective reasons,to prove the existence of extorting confessions by torture,evidence collection,fixed can achieve,and does not advance the prevention of the occurrence of extorting confessions by torture.For extorting confessions by torture,the harm to the article after the first comprehensive exposition of the specific methods.First,the purpose of extorting confessions by torture from the start,and gradually analysis,pointed out that extorting confessions by torture,not conducive to the fight against crime,but on the contrary will create new criminal offences or even indulgence,but also not conducive to the protection of human rights,thereby further undermining the authority of the law.Second,it reflects strong extorting confessions by torture and other issues specific to be compared.Pointed out that the extortion of confessions by torture in the criminal law against corruption and bribery than the more serious in the criminal proceedings and extended custody,lawyers excessively restrict the rights and interests of such issues,the greater the harm.Countermeasures on the extortion of confessions by torture,the use of the article after the first anti-method are discussed.First,the extOrtion of confessions by torture contain some of the more popular measures,to a certain reflection,such as the Right to Remain Silent, ONUS principle,illegal evidence exclusion rules in the country’s specific legal environment in which there may be limitations and the non-viability.Secondly,to be effective measures, including surveillance charge separation system,questioning witnesses system,physical examination of the system,it should be necessary to carry out the transformation or settings. For example,the grantor separation detection system not only make the detention center with public security organs separated,and to the detention center,and the compulsory treatment of all detainees under the public security organs,to the competent organs of the administration of justice,not to the courts or procurates jurisdiction.Similarly,the questioning witnesses system,the system of witness testimony the corresponding countermeasures to be taken on.更多还原