發(fā)布時間：2018-02-10 20:11

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 律師作證特免權(quán) 功利主義 隱私權(quán) 正當性分析 秘密性 例外　出處：《中國政法大學》2011年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：源于中國春秋時期的“親親相隱”制度,封建制度下的“容隱”制體現(xiàn)了人們對于親情倫理這些特殊社會關(guān)系的重視。與其讓犯罪嫌疑人的家屬作證,提供一些證明力不高的證言,還不如免去他們的作證義務,保護犯罪嫌疑人與家人之間的關(guān)系。隨著歷史的流逝,社會在不斷發(fā)展,法治也在步步向前,在權(quán)衡律師與委托人之間的信賴關(guān)系和國家追求案件事實真相的司法目的之間,律師作證特免權(quán)的權(quán)利體現(xiàn)了國家對于律師與委托人之間信賴關(guān)系的重視,寧愿以無法懲罰犯罪的代價,來換取律師與委托人之間信賴對方而無障礙地交流。很難想象還有什么比特免權(quán)制度更能阻止案件真實的發(fā)現(xiàn),律師作證特免權(quán)讓國家公訴機關(guān)不得不“舍近求遠”,無法從律師身上獲得犯罪嫌疑人的罪證,但是律師作證特免權(quán)保護了不僅僅是被告人,更重要的是讓委托人可以相信律師,對律師坦誠一切,以換取律師專業(yè)的法律服務,實現(xiàn)委托人不自證其罪和獲得律師幫助的憲法權(quán)利。 本文通過對英美法系的律師作證特免權(quán)制度的介紹,概括介紹特免權(quán)制度的歷史,對律師作證特免權(quán)進行界定,同時分析律師作證特免權(quán)制度的理論基礎(chǔ),通過考察不同的理論和質(zhì)疑的聲音,詳細分析律師作證特免權(quán)制度正當性。接著參照英美法的案例和經(jīng)典論著,從主體、客體、權(quán)利的放棄和例外對律師作證特免權(quán)制度進行全面的闡述,分析我國律師作證特免權(quán)制度的缺陷,論述完善律師作證特免權(quán)制度的必要性,提出律師作證特免權(quán)制度在中國的完善建議。 本文第一章對特免權(quán)制度作一個簡單的介紹,對于英美律師作證特免權(quán)制度的立法背景和立法進程進行概括,同時通過對律師工作成果、律師職業(yè)豁免權(quán)和律師職業(yè)道德的對比,厘定律師作證特免權(quán)的概念和內(nèi)涵。 第二章介紹支持律師作證特免權(quán)制度的兩種重要理論——功利主義理論和隱私權(quán)理論,同時吸收對律師作證特免權(quán)制度質(zhì)疑的相關(guān)觀點,提煉分析律師作證特免權(quán)制度的正當性。 第三章參照英美法國家的案例和專著,從律師作證特免權(quán)制度的主體、客體、權(quán)利的放棄和例外對律師作證特免權(quán)進行一個全面的介紹和闡述,試圖給出一個標準的律師作證特免權(quán)制度。 第四章分析當前中國法律規(guī)定的律師保密義務,論證完善律師作證特免權(quán)制度的必要性,介紹完善律師作證特免權(quán)制度的障礙,對完善律師作證特免權(quán)制度提出建議。最后得出的結(jié)論為:我國僅規(guī)定律師保密義務,要不斷完善律師作證特免權(quán)制度。結(jié)合中國的國情和實際,培養(yǎng)中國律師作證特免權(quán)存在所必須的文化土壤,建立相關(guān)的配套制度,才能建立完善的律師作證特免權(quán)制度。
[Abstract]:Originated from the "closeness" system of the Spring and Autumn period in China, the "concealment" system under the feudal system reflects the importance people attach to the special social relations of kinship ethics. It is better to absolve them of their duty to testify and to protect the relationship between suspects and their families. With the passage of history, society is constantly developing, and the rule of law is moving forward step by step. In the balance between the trust relationship between the lawyer and the client and the judicial purpose of the country pursuing the truth of the case, the lawyer's right to testify and exempt reflects the importance attached by the state to the trust relationship between the lawyer and the client. Would rather be able to punish the cost of crime, in return for lawyers and clients to trust each other without barriers to communication. It is difficult to imagine what more than the right to prevent the case from the true discovery, The power of lawyers to testify with special exemptions has forced the national public prosecution authorities to "take care of their own interests" and prevent them from obtaining the criminal suspects' evidence from lawyers. However, lawyers' power to testify with special exemptions protects not only the accused, but also, more importantly, enables clients to trust lawyers. To be honest with lawyers in exchange for professional legal services and to realize the constitutional right of clients not to testify against their crimes and to obtain the help of lawyers. In this paper, the author introduces the special exemption system of lawyers in Anglo-American law system, introduces the history of the special exemption system, defines the special exemption right of lawyers testifying, and analyzes the theoretical basis of the special exemption system of lawyers testifying at the same time. By examining different theories and voices of doubt, this paper analyzes in detail the legitimacy of the system of lawyers' privilege to testify, and then refers to the cases and classic works of Anglo-American law, from the subject, the object, The waiver and exception of the right to give up the right to testify by lawyers is an overall exposition of the system of privilege and exemption of lawyers, analyzes the defects of the system of privilege and exemption of lawyers testifying in our country, and discusses the necessity of perfecting the system of privilege and exemption for lawyers to testify. This paper puts forward some suggestions on how to perfect the system of lawyer's privilege of testifying in China. The first chapter of this paper makes a brief introduction to the privilege system, summarizes the legislative background and legislative process of the privilege system for the testifying of British and American lawyers, and at the same time, through the work of lawyers, By comparing the professional immunity of lawyers with the professional ethics of lawyers, this paper defines the concept and connotation of lawyers' privilege to testify. The second chapter introduces two important theories that support the privilege system of lawyers' testifying privilege-utilitarianism theory and privacy theory. At the same time, it absorbs the relevant views of questioning the system of lawyers' privilege to testify. Refining and analyzing the legitimacy of the system of lawyers' privilege to testify. The third chapter, referring to the cases and monographs of Anglo-American countries, gives a comprehensive introduction and exposition of lawyer's privilege to testify from the subject, object, right waiver and exception of lawyer's privilege to testify. Try to give a standard lawyer testifying privilege system. The 4th chapter analyzes the lawyer's duty to keep secret under the current Chinese law, demonstrates the necessity of perfecting the system of special exemption for lawyers to testify, and introduces the obstacles to perfecting the system of special exemption of lawyers' right to testify. This paper puts forward some suggestions on how to perfect the special exemption system of lawyers' right to testify. Finally, the conclusion is as follows: our country only prescribes the duty of confidentiality of lawyers, and we should constantly perfect the system of special exemption of lawyers' right to testify, which is based on the national conditions and the reality of China. Only by cultivating the cultural soil necessary for the existence of the privilege of Chinese lawyers to testify, and establishing relevant supporting systems, can we establish a perfect system of special exemption for lawyers to testify.
【學位授予單位】：中國政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D925.2;D926.5

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 陳桂明,紀格非;美國證據(jù)法中的保密特權(quán)原則及其對我國證據(jù)立法的啟示[J];法學評論;2002年02期

2 吳丹紅;透視證人拒證權(quán)的價值理念[J];律師世界;2001年09期

3 齊樹潔,黃斌;英國證據(jù)法中的律師特權(quán)規(guī)則及其借鑒意義[J];法學論壇;2002年05期

4 胡常龍;證人拒絕作證制度研究[J];政法論壇;2001年03期

相關(guān)博士學位論文 前1條

1 葛同山;辯護律師保密特權(quán)研究[D];上海交通大學;2009年

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前2條

1 邵夏虹;論律師—委托人特權(quán)[D];中國政法大學;2008年

2 嚴濤;論在我國構(gòu)建刑事訴訟證人拒證權(quán)法律制度的問題與對策[D];復旦大學;2009年

，

本文編號：1501336