發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-05-19 01:24

  本文選題：死刑案件辯護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn) + 無效辯護(hù)��； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：現(xiàn)代刑事訴訟制度的發(fā)展離不開辯護(hù)制度的不斷完善。擴(kuò)充辯護(hù)權(quán)的權(quán)利內(nèi)涵、保障辯護(hù)權(quán)的行使、完善辯護(hù)權(quán)的救濟(jì)是建立先進(jìn)刑事訴訟制度的重要環(huán)節(jié)。2012年修改后的《刑事訴訟法》豐富了辯護(hù)制度的內(nèi)涵,加強(qiáng)了刑事司法改革倡導(dǎo)的對(duì)抗制因素,并為律師充分發(fā)揮辯護(hù)職能提供了制度上的依據(jù)和保障。在此基礎(chǔ)上,學(xué)界對(duì)于辯護(hù)制度的關(guān)注從保障辯護(hù)權(quán)的享有這一角度逐漸轉(zhuǎn)移到關(guān)注辯護(hù)權(quán)的行使和救濟(jì),尤其關(guān)注死刑案件的辯護(hù)質(zhì)量以及對(duì)死刑被告辯護(hù)權(quán)的程序內(nèi)救濟(jì)。在我國,如果辯護(hù)律師怠于職守,侵犯被追訴人的辯護(hù)權(quán),對(duì)其救濟(jì)的手段通常是民事賠償、紀(jì)律處分或行政處罰。這些救濟(jì)措施更注重的是對(duì)律師不稱職行為的預(yù)防,對(duì)于該被追訴人在刑事案件中受到的不公正對(duì)待未提供實(shí)質(zhì)的救濟(jì)途徑。死刑的嚴(yán)厲性使得辯護(hù)權(quán)的有效行使和及時(shí)救濟(jì)對(duì)于死刑被告具有重大意義,在死刑案件中,侵害被告人辯護(hù)權(quán)的代價(jià)是巨大的�！盁o救濟(jì)就無權(quán)利”,既然辯護(hù)權(quán)的應(yīng)有之義包括被追訴人獲得律師的有效幫助,則對(duì)有效辯護(hù)的重視將合乎邏輯地產(chǎn)生出這一權(quán)利受到侵害時(shí)如何救濟(jì)的問題。無效辯護(hù)制度關(guān)注辯護(hù)質(zhì)量問題,致力于救濟(jì)被告辯護(hù)權(quán),消解辯護(hù)權(quán)分離帶來的風(fēng)險(xiǎn),對(duì)于促進(jìn)控辯平衡、實(shí)現(xiàn)司法公正具有重要意義。我國應(yīng)當(dāng)在死刑案件中借鑒該制度,并構(gòu)建符合中國國情的死刑案件無效辯護(hù)制度。死刑案件無效辯護(hù)制度源于對(duì)抗制國家,該制度發(fā)展至今具有豐富的實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)。我國學(xué)者對(duì)于提高死刑案件辯護(hù)質(zhì)量提出了不少對(duì)策,但對(duì)于在我國構(gòu)建無效辯護(hù)制度這一解決路徑持有截然相反的態(tài)度。本文針對(duì)支持者和反對(duì)者的主要觀點(diǎn),從中國現(xiàn)有的文化背景、司法環(huán)境、律師素質(zhì)和制度約束四方面進(jìn)行探討和評(píng)述,以論證通過在我國構(gòu)建死刑案件無效辯護(hù)制度,來提高死刑辯護(hù)質(zhì)量、救濟(jì)死刑被告受侵害的辯護(hù)權(quán)的可行性和必要性,并進(jìn)一步提出了我國死刑案件無效辯護(hù)制度的具體構(gòu)建。本文認(rèn)為辯護(hù)權(quán)內(nèi)含“有效性”這一權(quán)利要素,獲得有效辯護(hù)是享有辯護(hù)權(quán)的應(yīng)有之義。在相關(guān)概念辨析方面,有效辯護(hù)是一種先進(jìn)的刑事司法理念,無效辯護(hù)是保障有效辯護(hù)理念的具體制度。死刑案件無效辯護(hù)制度從權(quán)利基礎(chǔ)、制度主體、功能定位、價(jià)值追求和法律后果等五個(gè)方面具有豐富內(nèi)涵,并以人權(quán)保障、程序正義和程序性制裁作為指導(dǎo)理論。我國在建設(shè)法治國家的過程中,對(duì)于人權(quán)和程序的重視、審判中心主義改革的提出、“少殺、慎殺”刑事政策的踐行以及提高死刑案件辯護(hù)質(zhì)量的現(xiàn)實(shí)需求都為無效辯護(hù)制度的引入提供了契機(jī)和條件。在制度構(gòu)建上,我國應(yīng)制定統(tǒng)一的死刑案件辯護(hù)標(biāo)準(zhǔn),針對(duì)嚴(yán)重的律師失職辯護(hù)和政府阻撓辯護(hù)行為總結(jié)出無效辯護(hù)的判定標(biāo)準(zhǔn),同時(shí)應(yīng)當(dāng)構(gòu)建與之相適應(yīng)的配套制度,提高死刑指定辯護(hù)案件的律師保障,建立死刑案件辯護(hù)律師的準(zhǔn)入制度等等。
[Abstract]:The development of the modern criminal procedure system is inseparable from the continuous improvement of the defense system, the expansion of the right connotation of the right to defense, the protection of the exercise of the right to defense, and the improvement of the remedy for the right to defence, which is an important link in the establishment of the advanced criminal procedure system, which has enriched the connotation of the system of defense after the revision of the criminal procedure law for.2012 years, and has strengthened the advocacy of the reform of criminal justice. On the basis of this, the attention of the academic community to the defense system is gradually transferred to the exercise and relief of the right to defense, especially the quality of the defense of the death penalty and the right to defense of the death penalty defendant. In our country, in our country, if the defence counsel is slack in the duty and infringes the right of the accused, the means of the remedies are usually civil compensation, disciplinary or administrative punishment. These relief measures pay more attention to the prevention of the incompetence of the lawyer and the unjust treatment of the accused in the criminal case. The severity of the death penalty makes the effective exercise of the right of defense and the timely relief to the defendant of the death penalty of great significance. In the death penalty case, the cost of the right to defend the defendant is huge. "No relief is not right", since the right of the right of Defense includes the effective help of the accused to the lawyer. The importance of effective defense will be logical real estate to create the problem of how this right is infringed. The invalid defense system pays attention to the problem of defense quality, is committed to the remedy of the defendant's right to defend the defense, and dispels the risk caused by the separation of the right of defense. It is of great significance to promote the balance of the defense and defense and realize the justice of the law. The system is used for reference, and the system of invalidation defense in death penalty cases is constructed in accordance with China's national conditions. The system of invalid defense of the death penalty cases originated from the antagonism state. The system has been developed with rich practical experience so far. On the basis of the main views of the supporters and opponents, this paper discusses and reviews the four aspects of China's existing cultural background, judicial environment, the quality of lawyers and institutional constraints, in order to demonstrate the improvement of the quality of the death penalty by the construction of the invalid defense system in the death penalty case in China, and to remedy the death penalty. The feasibility and necessity of the right to defend the infringement, and further put forward the concrete construction of the system of invalid defense in the death penalty case in our country. This article holds that the right of defense contains the right element of "validity", and the effective defence is the right of the right to defend. In the related concept discrimination, effective defense is an advanced criminal. Judicial idea, invalid defense is the concrete system to guarantee the effective defense concept. The invalid defense system in the death penalty case has rich connotations in five aspects, such as the basis of the rights, the main body of the system, the function orientation, the pursuit of value and the legal consequences, and the theory of the protection of human rights, procedural justice and procedural sanctions. In the process, the emphasis on human rights and procedures, the reform of the trial centralism, the practice of the criminal policy of "less killing, careful killing" and the actual demand for improving the quality of the defense of death penalty cases provide the opportunity and conditions for the introduction of the invalid defense system. The serious lawyer's defenses and the government's obstruction of defense summarize the criteria for the judgment of the invalid defense. At the same time, the supporting system should be constructed to improve the protection of the lawyer in the case of the death penalty, and to establish the admittance system of the defense lawyer in the death penalty case and so on.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 王彪;;刑事訴訟中的“辯審沖突”現(xiàn)象研究[J];中國刑事法雜志;2015年06期

2 陳瑞華;;刑事訴訟中的有效辯護(hù)問題[J];蘇州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2014年05期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 任俊;制度辯護(hù)：問題和進(jìn)路[D];華東師范大學(xué);2012年

2 艾超;辯護(hù)權(quán)研究[D];武漢大學(xué);2010年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 郭芬;審判中心主義模式下的有效辯護(hù)[D];華東政法大學(xué);2016年

2 崔玉;論保障死刑被追訴人的律師辯護(hù)權(quán)[D];中國政法大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1908096