监视居住制度研究

【作者】 孙聪；

【导师】 孙长永；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 纵观世界各国法律，监视居住制度无论是在英美法系国家还是大陆法系国家都比较鲜见。监视居住作为一项具有中国特色的刑事强制措施，其本身有着其他强制措施不可替代的优越品质及制度价值：它可以在不予关押的情况下，对犯罪嫌疑人、被告人予以应有的控制，既可以防止其逃避、阻碍诉讼的顺利进行，又可以节约司法成本，体现诉讼经济原则；既可以防止错捕、滥捕，有力维护司法的权威性，又可以少捕、少关，防止犯罪嫌疑人、被告人间的犯罪传播，预防更多的犯罪发生。但是，由于立法的不完善，导致监视居住制度可操作性差，在司法实践中的适用率较低，执行过程中问题重重，以至其应有的功能没有得到发挥，价值没有得到体现。由此学术上便产生了关于监视居住的存废之争。支持去留的双方学者各执一词，莫衷一是。笔者认为在目前中国的司法环境下，监视居住制度还有其存在的合理性和正当性，它的实际运用价值也是不可小觑的。问题的关键不在于“去或者留”，而是怎样通过完善立法的手段将监视居住制度在实践中所存在的问题——予以解决。正值《刑事诉讼法》再修改之际，应该在完善立法的基础上，让监视居住制度发挥其应有功效，以完善我国的刑事强制措施体系。论文全文由四个部分组成。第一部分首先对监视居住制度的概念、由来及其历史发展进行介绍，并从比较法视野考察了域外的类似制度；然后对监视居住制度进行了功能评析和价值评价，论证了监视居住制度的优秀品质；最后，将监视居住与相关的刑事强制措施，如羁押、取保候审、保释、限制居住等进行了比较研究。第二部分主要是对监视居住制度的立法和实务现状进行评析。文章指出监视居住制度的立法不尽完善，关于监视居住的规定总体来说比较原则，很多关键性的问题(如适用对象、执行地点、执行方式等)没有给予明确的规定。立法的粗疏导致该制度在司法实践中难以操作。在实务评析部分，文章指出监视居住制度在司法实践中暴露出来的诸多问题，例如执行机关错位、执行地点不一、执行方式混乱、监督与救济缺失等现象。这一系列问题导致了监视居住的适用出现了两个方面的负面结果：一是监视居住措施在实践中的适用率很低，二是监视居住措施被滥用。笔者利用自己亲自到重庆市检察院某分院调研到的数据证明了监视居住措施的适用率极低，并系统分析了监视居住措施被实务部门冷落的原因；而监视居住措施被滥用的主要表现是监视居住羁押化、监视居住超期现象严重。第三部分就监视居住制度的存废之争进行了阐述。尔后提出作者的观点：监视居住作为强制措施的一种，无论在立法上还是在司法实践中的确存在不少问题，但仔细分析后可以看出，这些问题都是由于立法规定的不完善而导致的，如监视居住的适用对象、执行地点、执行机关和执行过程中存在的一系列问题，都是可以通过完善立法，科学规定监视居住制度而予以解决的。正值我国《刑事诉讼法》即将再修改的大好时机，应该在现有监视居住制度的基础上，通过立法的完善，解决监视居住存在的种种问题，使其发挥应有功能，体现其优秀的制度价值，从而优化我国刑事强制措施体系，以便更好地服务于我国的刑事诉讼。第四部分则是对监视居住制度的改革与完善进行了相关的探讨。主张监视居住制度的立法规定无论是适用对象、执行地点方面，还是在执行过程中，都应该时刻考虑到比例原则，以比例原则作为立法标准，从而更科学、更合理地完善监视居住制度的法律规庭。其次对监视居住的立法完善分为适用对象、执行地点、执行程序、监督与救济等四个方面提出具体的建议和构想，希望能够对监视居住制度的改革与完善有所裨益，并使该制度在保持其中国特色的前提下，继续体现其价值，成为我国刑事强制措施中不可或缺的一部分。更多还原

【Abstract】 Having a general observation of world’s law, the system ofsurveillance of residence is comparatively rarely seen in both Civil-lawcountries and Case-law countries. As a criminal compulsory measurehaving Chinese characteristics, surveillance of residence itself has theadvantageous quality comparing to the other compulsory measures.Without putting one behind bars, it can give due controlling to thecriminal suspect, the defendant, and prevent them from hindering thelegal action proceed as planned and without a hitch from being inprogress. It can also guard against erroneous arrest, and forcefullyupkeep the authority of judiciary right. It can reduce the chances of thembeing arrested or putting behind bars, defend criminal information fromspreading between the suspects or defendants, in order to prevent morecrime being committed. It can save judiciary cost, and embody legalaction classics. However, surveillance of residence is not suitable to beoperated in China, because the legislation of this measure is notimproved and perfect. So the use rate in putting it into practice is lower,and its due function is not fully embodied. The academic circle is now inhot dispute about weather the system of surveillance of residence shouldbe existed or not. The scholar of both sides has his own opinion, unableto get to the agreement. The author thinks that in the actual judiciaryenvironment of present China, the system of surveillance of residence isstill of rationality and reasonability. And its reality applies value shouldnot be underestimated. The crux of the matter does not lie in "to be ornot to be", but in how to solve all of the problems about the system ofsurveillance of residence in practice, by perfecting the legislation. At themoment of it happening that Criminal Procedure Law of China revisesagain, we ought to on basis of perfecting the legislation, let the system,guarding so excellent in local territory, bring its due effect into play, toperfect criminal compulsory measures of our country system, and tobring the much better service to criminal procedure in our country. The paper is divided into four parts.The first part is about the concept, the origin and development ofthe system of surveillance of residence. Then, the author compares thissystem with the similar systems of foreign countries, from the angle ofcomparative jurisprudence. Besides, the author also different this systemfrom the relative compulsory measures such as detain, the system ofobtaining a guarantor and awaiting trial out of custody, release on bail,and restriction of residence.The second part is mainly to analyze the present situation oflegislation and practice, and try to point out the imperfect of the systemof surveillance of residence.Then goes to the third part. There are always disputes following thecontradiction. Because the system of surveillance of residence has bothits value and problem in legislation and practice, so in this part theauthor has her own point about how to improve the system, on the basisof the reason of both sides. She tries to improve the system from theobjection to apply, the place to carry out, the executive organ andimplementation process etc.The last part is about how to improve the legislation. In order toimprove the system of surveillance of residence, we should makedefinite the object to use, the way to use, and the period to use, under theprinciple of proportionality. Besides, it is necessary to make up thesystem of supervision and relief for it.更多还原