【摘要】 留置取代"两规"彰显了法治反腐思维,较"两规"而言具有较大的法治进步意义。但是,由于留置措施立法的单一化缺陷,其在理论上与比例原则和人权保障原则有待进一步衔接;同时,监察机关在监察调查实践中也面临权力恣意或者权力萎缩的两难困境。为此,学者提出了留置措施内部控制或强制措施外部借用两种方案,试图化解留置措施面临的理论与实践困境。而基于法治反腐的理论需求与现实考量,监察机关宜在监察解释或实施细则中对留置措施作广义与狭义区分。广义留置具体可包括留置盘问、留置取保、留置监视以及紧急留置,狭义留置则仅指《监察法》第22条规定之情形。更多还原

【Abstract】 The replacement of "two rules" by liens highlights the thought of anti-corruption by law, which is of greater significance to the progress of rule of law compared with "two rules". However, due to the unitary defects of legislation of lien measure, it needs to be further connected with the principle of proportionality and the principle of human rights protection in theory. Meanwhile, supervisory agencies also face the dilemma of arbitrary power or shrinking power in the practice of supervision and investigation. Therefore, scholars have proposed two schemes of internal control of lien measures or external borrowing of compulsory measures, trying to resolve the theoretical and practical difficulties faced by lien measures. Based on theoretical needs and practical considerations of combating corruption by rule of law, supervisory agencies should define lien measures in a broad and narrow sense concerning supervisory interpretation or implementation rules. In a broad sense, lien measures include interrogation, bail, surveillance and emergency lien. In a narrow sense, lien measure only refers to the circumstances specified in article 22 in Supervision Law.更多还原