必须培育沉默权移植的土壤

【作者】 宋勤；

【导师】 李学宽；

【作者基本信息】 安徽大学 ， 法律， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 本论文由引言和四个部分组成。 引言概括出本文的结论和意义，并分析了当前学界对沉默权研究的现状。 第一部分，阐述了沉默权的产生、发展的历史演变过程，并就近二十年来西方对沉默权的改革、限制的内容进行分析，指出对我们的启示。沉默权的产生有其漫长的过程。不同的学者对其产生时间说法不一。本文将重点放在研究沉默权的思想渊源上，指出其思想渊源来自基督教的学说和教义以及欧洲大陆普通法。沉默权产生后，在西方主要国家如英、美、法等国有了重大发展，形成了近代意义上的沉默权观念。但近二十年来，西方各国又作出了不同程度的调整和限制。根据沉默权产生、发展的历史演变条件和特点，文章指出对待沉默权问题，应当考虑到四个方面因素：一是其产生的特定思想渊源，二是西方国家普遍追求民主自由的历史与意识水平，三是西方法院系统的发达程度及律师参与的广泛性，四是沉默权自身的弱点。这一部分使我们对沉默权有了初步认识，即沉默权的生长是由特定的土壤决定的，而对这一历史演变的分析，使我们对于沉默权在我国的移植多了一些清醒认识。 第二部分，对沉默权的内涵进行了比较，对其价值取向作出分析，重点指出了沉默权在中国移植的意义。关于沉默权的定义，文章简单列出了当前法学界代表性的几种观点，虽然提法不一，但究其主要内容基本一致。沉默权制度的主要内容包括广义和狭义两种。虽然沉默权已经得到西方各法治国家的普遍认可，但各中文摘要国沉默权的具体内容不尽相同，而且英美法系国家与大陆法系国家分别采用广义及狭义之说。文章对沉默权的价值取向进行了理论分析，肯定了沉默权有其存在的积极意义。最后，文章认为，沉默权制度是世界各国的必由选择，也是我国法制发展的大势所趋，并具体提出在中国确立沉默权的八大意义。 第三部分，就沉默权与我国现实国情的冲突作出分析。文章首先批驳了认为沉默权符合我国现实国情的儿点主要看法，之后，对沉默权与我国现实国情尤其是公安工作实践的冲突进行了详细分析，其一是与社会管理体制的冲突。强调国家、集体利益高于个人利益，与西方强调个人自由、民主不同。其二是与文化意识的冲突。传统儒家人文学说的影响，与西方罗马复兴的思潮格格不入。三是与传统的重实体、轻程序的法律意识的冲突。在我国，程序法一直是实体法的工具，在法律意识里始终是追求“事实真实”而非“法律真实”。不树立程序至上的法律意识，也就不存在沉默权存在的思想土壤。四是与具体法律制度的冲突。如人证制度和律师制度，与沉默权生长的土壤也不能相融。人证制度中，证人缺乏起码的正义感;律师参与刑事诉讼程度太低，不能保障犯罪嫌疑人、被告人行使沉默的权利。五是从公安工作的实践出发，指出沉默权对公安工作会造成至少四个方面的冲击，整个公安工作侦查模式要彻底改变，对这突如其来的一切变化，我们还没有充分的准备。六是通过对检察工作实践的分析，指出与检察工作的冲突。 第四部分，就如何培育沉默权在我国移植的土壤初步提出了凡点建议。如前所述，沉默权与我国现实国情有着多方面的冲突，但我们对沉默权移植的前景是有信心的。当然，实现这一目标要靠社会各界尤其是法学界全体人员的努力。首先，文章指出修改后的刑事诉讼法取得了很大进步，之后对其不足部分提出）L点建议，如明确将无罪推定原则上升为刑事诉讼的基本原则，强化刑事诉讼的民主化及对公民权益的保障，加大庭审制度的改革等；其次，文章对于沉默权制度的配套制度建设提出了六点建议。如证据制度、律师制度、司法独立的改革，建立和完善羁押管理制度、辩诉交易制度，坚持坦白从宽、抗拒从严制度等。这些建议的提出，都离不开对沉默权历史的考察和分析。正是因为沉默权的产生、发展与这些配套制度息息相关，没有这些制度，不会有今天意义上的沉默权，因此，我们必须在看到沉默权与国情冲突的同时，加强对其生长土壤的人文关怀，从培育土壤着手，改变我国的国情，从而使沉默权水到渠成。这应当是解决沉默权在我国移植的根本之路。更多还原

【Abstract】 The dissertation is consisted of five parts including preface and four chapters.The preface generalizes the conclusion and meaning of the dissertation , then analyzes the current research in the right to silence.The first chapter expatiates the process of the creation and development of the right to silence , analyzing the reform and limitation of it in western countries in the past twenty years and the enlightenment to us .Different people have different viewpoints on the endless process of the creation of it .The article plays great value on the research of the thoughtful source of the right to silence, pointing out that it originates from Christian doctrine and the common law of European continents. It developed greatly in some major western countries such as Britain, America, France and so on , so the contemporary thoughts of it comes into being. But in the past twenty years , it has been adjusted and limited to different degree in the western countries. According to the condition and characteristics of the process of the creation and development of it, the dissertation points out that there are four important factors related to it :one is the particular thoughtful source of it; another is thought of democracy and freedom of western people; the third is content of the development of western court system and the participation of the lawyer; the fourth is the self weakness of it. This part makes us have a deeper sight on the transplantation of it because it grows in the particularsoil.The second chapter makes the comparison of the content of the right to silence, analyzes its inner value and points out its transplantation in China. It also lists some representative viewpoints of the definition of it. There are two aspects of it: the broad one and the narrow one. Although it has been broadly recognized by western countries , its contents vary from country to country. For example, countries of Britain-American legal system adopt the broad definition while countries of Continental legal system adopt the narrow one. The article makes the analysis of the value of it and affirm its positive meaning. Finally , the dissertation states that the adopting of it is the right choice by not only the western countries but also China and there are eight sorts of meaning of the adopting of it in China.The third chapter explains the conflicts of the transplantation of the right to silence in China. Firstly, the chapter criticizes some main points of the correct absorbing of it then elaborates the conflicts between it and the realistic position especially the practice of public security in China. There are six sorts of conflicts. One is with the system of social regulation, the interests of country and collective are more important than that of individual and vice verse in the western countries. Another is with cultural consciousness, traditional Confucianism theory is different from the tide of thought of Rome. The third is with the legal consciousness which puts more value on the procedure than on the entity. In China the procedure law are always regarded as the tools of the entity law and "practical fact " is more important than "law fact" . But there where is no the consciousness of procedure, where ison the soil the right of silence can exist in. The fourth is with concrete law regulation such as witness and lawyer regulation. The absence of just ice thought of witness and the low degree of participation in criminal litigation of lawyer results in the insufficient protect of suspected and accused person. The fifth is with the practice of public security. Suffered from four sorts of compact , the whole investigation work should be changed. The sixth is with prosecuting work. The fourth chapter tell us how to transplant and cultivate the right to silence. Although there are some conflicts between it and practical position, we are still confident with the transplantation of it. In order to attain the target, people from all fields including law science must make great efforts. We have made great p更多还原