【作者】 郭奇；

【导师】 陈玉忠；

【作者基本信息】 河北大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2006， 硕士

【摘要】 随着刑事司法改革日益深入，人们对刑事诉讼理论的基本问题也日趋重视，其中包括刑事公诉权，但在我国对此研究仍很薄弱。公诉权理论的研究是在民事诉权的影响下展开的，因此借鉴民事诉权的相关理论研究成果，结合刑事诉讼的特点，来研究公诉权是很有益处的。本文认为公诉权仅仅存在刑事诉讼领域中，而不赞成个别学者主张公诉权应超出刑事诉讼的范围，甚至延伸至民事诉讼中的论点，因为尽管在民事诉讼领域中存在检察机关提起公益诉讼的呼声，但此种诉讼本质上具有“私益”的特征，不是真正的“公”诉权。 该文以诉讼是实体法与程序法共同作用的“场”的方法为基调，来评析刑事公诉权的各种学说，分析各自得失利弊，认为采取具体公诉权说较为合适，并明确公诉权的程序内涵与实体内涵及其一般特性与自身特性。针对公诉权性质的定位，第二章总结分析其种种争论，指出公诉权的行政性的根本依据在于检察机关的组织体制和行动原则，而司法性的根本理由在于防范行政不当干预司法。前者从内部角度看待公诉权，后者是从外部保障视角来看待此问题，两者不可偏废。但对我国现状而言，维护检察独立，倡导公诉权的司法性，保障人权，实现对公安侦查的控权，似乎显得很为迫切。故主张我国应采用双重属性说。第三章选取诉讼主体适格和公诉利益两方面来分析公诉权的构成要件。刑事诉讼主体适格的认定必须依据诉讼案件的性质和诉讼进行的阶段来判断，不同于实体刑法的认定标准。而公诉利益属于“救济法领域”，具有“筛选”作用；对于公诉利益的救济讨论，也就是第四章的对公诉权滥用的各种情形如何进行控制与救济的问题。针对公诉权滥用，认为属于检察制度的“内生性”问题，只有在刑事诉讼中引入对检察裁量的司法审查机制，即在开始正式的审判程序前设置一个相对独立的审前程序，以确定对被告人的指控是否存在适当的理由或者合理的根据，才能从根本上把问题解决。最后部分以防止突袭裁判为视角，将突袭裁判分成法律性突袭性裁判与事实性突袭性裁判，指出公诉权的行使如何与审判权、应诉权进行协调。前者拟从变更起诉为例进行阐述，以法院所认定者与检察官所起诉者是否为同一案件，分成超出同一性变更与同一性范围内的变更。而对于后者以庭外调查为例展开。主张通过被告的申请权对公诉权进行抗辩以及对法院调查证据范围的形成及扩张产生重要影响。即当被告行使证据申请更多还原

【Abstract】 With the further advancing of criminal judicial reform , people become more and more concerned about the basic problems of the criminal procedure, including the power of criminal public prosecution. But there aren’t further enough studies about it in China. The study of Power of Public Prosecution theory is carried out under the impacts of the civil right of action, so it is very helpful to make use of the concerned civil right of action theory to study the Power of Public Prosecution under the light of its own characteristics. This thesis takes it for granted that the power of public prosecution only exists in the field of criminal prosecution, and it is against the view, which is only supported by few scholars, that the power of public prosecution should go beyond the criminal procedure or even can stretch to the civil procedure. Although there are the exclaims of the public good prosecution, but to some extent, it has something to do with the private good in its nature, so it is not the real power of public prosecution.The keynote of this thesis is to take prosecution as the field which is under the co-influences of both substantive law and procedural law. In terms of this understanding, this thesis analyzes and criticizes the schools of Power of Criminal Public Prosecution studies. The aim is to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each school and finally make clear the characteristics and connotations of Power of Criminal Public Prosecution. It is proper to adopt the concrete power of public prosecution, and then explain the procedural connotation and the substantive connotation and the common traits and special traits of the power of public prosecution. After the determination of the nature of Public Prosecution, in the second chapter the different disputations about it are analyzed and summed up that it should take the dual property in China. It also points out that the administration of public prosecution is based on the system and action principle of the procuratorial organ, and the judicature should base itself on the avoiding of the improperly administrative intervening of judicature. The former is an inside insight of the public prosecution power, while the latter is the study of the guarantee from the outside aspect. As to the current circumstances in China, it is crucial to guarantee the更多还原