【作者】 牛晨曦；

【导师】 白淑卿；

【作者基本信息】 河北大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2005， 硕士

【摘要】 公诉案件的庭前审查程序一直是刑事诉讼法学界争论的热点问题,探讨我国刑事诉讼庭前审查程序的理论基础、具体构架以及相关配套措施,不仅有着重大的理论意义,而且有着重大的现实意义。本文较为系统地分析了我国当前庭前审查程序所存在的不足和缺陷,亟需重新构建我国公诉案件的庭前审查程序。首先总结了西方英、美、法、德、日、意等国的庭前审查程序,指出庭前审查程序承担着案件的过滤,案件的分流,庭前准备及纠错,证据的保全、展示、检验等四大功能,其更深层的理论基础是权力的分立与制衡,公正与效率的冲突与整合以及保障人权。虽然在我国构建庭前审查程序存在着一定的困难,但是也有着三个有利的条件。法律观念的更新尤其是法官的法律观念的改变为我们构建庭前审查程序提供了文化条件;正在逐步走向深入的政治体制的改革为之提供了政治条件;而我国的司法体制的变革尤其是相关的司法实务部门在审前程序上的不断探索为之提供了最直接的条件和动力。我国的庭前审查程序的构建不仅要遵循程序公正的一般标准,还必须融入一些特殊原则: 防止预断原则,控辩双方共同参与原则,注重效率原则,司法权保障原则。在具体的程序构建上,应当把庭前审查程序作为一种独立的程序,为了最大限度的防止预断,应设立独立的庭前审查法官来行使审查权。在起诉方式上,应当实行全部案卷主义。在此基础上,并系统的规划了庭前审查程序的整个流程,重点指出了证据开示制度应该由预审法官主持,双方参与;且应当赋予被告人管辖权异议的权利、程序选择权和告知申请回避的权利等。庭前审查程序还需要一些相应的配套设施来加以完善,诸如法官情况公示制度,庭审法官的起诉状一本主义,庭前审查程序同审前准备工作的相分离。制度的设计还需要文化的支撑,我国庭前审查程序的理性设计并有效运行,同样也需要我国法律观念的不断变革。更多还原

【Abstract】 Pretrial review procedure for the public prosecution case always is the hotspot of criminal procedure world . Discusses in its theory base, frondose truss and the correlative layout measures, Not only has the important theory significance, moreover has important practical significance. This article has systematically analyzed the limitation and the flaws in current pretrial review procedure of our nation, and we desiderate to reconstruct our pretrial review procedure for the public prosecution case. Firstly, the article have summarized the pretrial review procedure in west nations such as England, America, France, Germany, Japan and Italy, pointed out that the pretrial review procedure have undertook the four function:the case filtering, the case distributary, pretrial preparation and error correction, the evidence preserving and the demonstration and the examination. Its deep theory bases are separate and balanceable power, the conflict and conformity between fair and efficiency , safeguarding human rights. Although constructing our pretrial review procedure have the some difficulties, but also have three advantageous conditions. The updating of the ideas of law especially the change of ideas of law for judges have provided the cultural condition for constructing our pretrial review procedure; The political system reforming which is step by step developing have provided the political condition for it; And our judicial system reforming especially the continuous explore of correlative judicial practice department in the pretrial procedure have provided the most direct condition and the motivity for it. To constructing our pretrial review procedure not only must follow the general standard of procedure fair, also must swing in with some special principles: the principle of preventing prejudge, the principle of the collective participate of the accuse and the defendant, the principle of attach importance to efficiency, the principle of jurisdiction safeguard. As for the constructing in the concrete procedure, We must regard the pretrial review procedure as a independent procedure; In order to farthest preventing prejudge, we should arrange a independent prejudication judge to exercise censor power. On prosecution way, we should implement the whole records creed. On this foundation, the article systemly marked out the whole flow for pretrial review procedure, and pointed out especially that the evidence revelation which base on bilateral participation should be managed by prejudication judge; we also should entitle the accused the jurisdiction objection and the procedure option and apply withdrawal and so on. Pretrial review procedure also need some corresponding necessary facilities to consummate, such as the system of judge’s situation showing, the creed of only indictment for the judge, the separate on pretrial review procedure and pretrial preparatory work. The system design also needs cultural support, and the rational design and the effective function of our pretrial review procedure similarly also needs the continuous change of law ideas.更多还原