【作者】 刘亮；

【导师】 王圣扬；

【作者基本信息】 安徽大学 ， 法律， 2013， 硕士

【摘要】 未决羁押是指为了确保诉讼程序顺利进行,在法院作出生效判决以前,由专门机关依法暂时将犯罪嫌疑人、被告人置于特定的场所,剥夺其人身自由的强制措施。未决羁押具有强制性、例外性、临时性和法定性。作为刑事诉讼中的重要制度,未决羁押具有程序保障、维护安全、人权保障的功能。未决被羁押人的权利保障具有三大理论基础,即无罪推定理论、权力制约理论和人权保障理论。首先,由无罪推定原则可知,任何人在未经司法程序最终确认之前不得认为其有罪,它旨在保障被追诉人的合法权利,强调被追诉人的主体地位。其次,权力制约理论向来是为防止权力遭到滥用和异化,因此它可以限制未决羁押权的任意行使,减少对公民人身自由权和其他合法权利的侵犯。最后,人权保障业已成为当今时代的主题,尊重和保障未决被羁押人的权利是基于人权保障理论的时代要求。鉴于未决被羁押人权利保障的重要性,联合国刑事司法准则对此规定了一系列的标准。从所适用的原则方面来看,未决羁押应当具有司法审查原则、合法性原则、司法救济原则、比例性原则等基本原则。从所享有的权利方面来看,未决被羁押人享有知悉权、异议权、律师帮助权、不受非法逮捕权、暂时被释放权、及时受审权、不受任意羁押权、非法获赔权以及其他相关规定的权利。我国司法实践中的未决羁押存在着各种问题,主要体现在司法审查、司法救济的缺乏,律师帮助的有限性,羁押场所的非中立化,普遍羁押现象、超期羁押现象以及刑讯逼供现象严重。为了解决上述问题,2012年新通过的《刑事诉讼法》对未决羁押进行了较大幅度的修改完善,如立即送往看守所和严格限制不通知家属的规定、增加羁押必要性审查的规定、对律师帮助权的部分完善、对无罪推定原则的进一步完善以及逮捕条件的细化等。但与联合国刑事司法准则相比,新《刑事诉讼法》又存在着缺憾,如不得强迫自证其罪权利与如实回答义务的冲突、律师帮助权的限制性、被羁押人知悉权的不健全、羁押必要性审查规定的不具体以及被羁押人异议权的缺乏等。为了保护新的立法成果,贯彻落实新刑事诉讼法的立法精神,更为了保障犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的诉讼权利和其他合法权益,可以从以下方面进行努力：推行羁押场所中立化,统一由司法行政机关管辖；取消被羁押人应当如实回答的义务,保障其不得强迫自证其罪的权利；赋予律师讯问时的在场权,增加律师帮助权的救济机制,以确保律师帮助权得到落实：健全被羁押人对羁押理由的知悉权,重视知悉权的全面性；施行被羁押人对羁押的异议权,保障被羁押人合法权益；具化羁押必要性审查制度,便于实际操作执行。更多还原

【Abstract】 Pretrial custody is a kind of compulsory measure that suspects and defendants are deprived of their freedom and put in a certain place temporarily by the specialized agency according to law before the court judgment in order to ensure proceeding smoothly. Pretrial custody is mandatory, exceptional, temporary and statutory. As an important system in criminal procedure, it has the function of procedure guarantee, security maintenance and human rights protection.The detainees’rights protection has three main theoretical foundations:the presumption of innocence, power restriction, human rights protection. Firstly, according to the presumption of innocence theory, anyone without judicial process should not be considered guilty. It aims to protect the legal rights of the accused and emphasize the dominant position of the accused. Secondly, the theory of power restriction has always been to prevent power abuse and alienation, it can limit pretrial custody right and reduce the violation of citizen’s freedom and other legal rights. Finally, human rights protection has become a theme of the era. Respect and protection of the detainees’ rights is based on the requirement of human rights protection theory.In view of the importance of detainees’rights protection in pretrial custody, the United Nations Criminal Justice Standards have provided a series of standards. From the point of its applicable principles, pretrial custody should have following basic principles:the statutory principle, the principle of necessity, the principle of proportionality, and the principle of judicial review. In term of the rights, the detainees’have right to enjoy freedom from arbitrary and illegal arrest and detention, be informed the reason of the arrest and detention, be brought to judicial organization promptly, be released temporarily, take exception against detention, have a trial within a reasonable time, get assistance from counsel, receive compensation for illegal detention, and humane treatment.There are various problems in the judicial practice of our pretrial custody, mainly in the lack of judicial review and judicial relief, finiteness of counsel assistance, non-neutrality of detention place, general detention, extended detention, the serious torture. In order to solve the above problems, the Code of Criminal Procedure of2012have improved greatly on pretrial custody, such as immediately sent to detention center, not notify the family with strict restriction, review the necessity of detention, improvement of counsel assistance, further improve on the principle of the presumption of innocence, refinement of the conditions of arrest, etc. But compared with the Untied Nations Criminal Justice Standards, there are some shortcomings in the new Code of Criminal Procedure, such as the conflict between the privilege against self-incrimination and obligation to answer truthfully, restriction of counsel assistance, insufficient reason of the arrest and detention, unspecific rule on review the necessity of detention, and lack of the right to take exception against detention.In order to protect new legislative achievements, implement the spirit of the new Code of Criminal Procedure, and protect the suspect, defendant’s rights and other interests, we can make great efforts from the following aspects. The detention center should be neutral under the jurisdiction of administrative organization of justice. The detainee’s obligation to answer truthfully could be canceled to protect his privilege against self-incrimination. Lawyers have the right to be on the scene when the detainee is questioned, and increase relief mechanism of counsel assistance. The right to be informed the reason of the arrest and detention should be improved comprehensively. The right to take exception against detention shall be put into practice for protecting detainee’s legal right. The system of reviewing the necessity of detention should be specific for it is convenient for practical operation.更多还原