论检侦一体化改革与刑事审前程序之重构..docVIP

论检侦一体化改革与刑事审前程序之重构. 内容提要nbsp; 由现行刑事诉讼法规制的控辩式庭审方式贯彻控审分离原则所决定，检察官在庭审中独立承担起代表国家追诉犯罪的职责。从保障控诉职能充分有效地实现出发，本文认为，在我国刑事诉讼中，应进行检侦一体化改革，确立检察机关在追诉活动中的主导地位，加强侦查监督，从而打破检侦各自为政的局面。伴随这一改革，还应对公诉案件的审前程序进行改造，合理构建其内部关系。其目的在于，既保证国家司法资源的优化配置及追诉活动顺畅、有效地进行，同时抑制国家刑事权力的滥用，切实保障人权，促进司法公正。 主题词nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; 司法改革nbsp; 检侦一体化nbsp; 审前程序nbsp; 侦辩平衡nbsp; 诉讼民主化 nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; ABSTRACTnbsp; The public procurator takes the sole and independent responsibility of prosecuting crimes in court trials, according to the principle that accusation and trial should be separated, determined by the adversary trial of present criminal procedure law. For the sake of the full and effective fulfillment of accusation, the author thinks that China should set about the reform of combination of prosecution and investigation to ensure the dominance of procuratorial organs in the course of prosecution, strengthen investigative supervision and break free from the independence of prosecution and investigation. Together with the reform, pre-trial procedure of public prosecution cases should be reformed with the purpose of a reasonable interior trial structure. The reforms aim to guarantee the rational disposition of national judicial resources and the smoothness and convenience of public prosecution, and safeguard human rights with earnest and promote judicial justice as well. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; Key wordsnbsp;nbsp; judicial reform, combination of prosecution and investigation, pre-trial procedure, balance of investigation and advocacy, procedural democratizationnbsp; nbsp;nbsp;nbsp; 1996年修正的刑事诉讼法的颁布施行为标志，我国刑事审判方式发生了由职权主义向职权主义与当事人主义相结合的模式转变。新刑事审判方式（控辩式庭审方式）以控审分离、控辩对抗为基点进行构建，法官由原来的积极审问者变为保留一定职权但倾向于中立、公正的裁判者，检察官与辩护方相对立，完全承担起追诉犯罪的举证责任。在这一情况下，公诉方的控诉质量直接关系到对刑事犯罪这一危害社会整体利益的行为的追诉效度，而确保庭审前追诉活动的有效进行，依法快速、全面、有效地收集证据，无疑是检察官在庭审中完成举证责任的前提。因此，现行控辩式庭审方式必然呼唤积极有效的追诉制度与程序。现行刑事诉讼体制存在若干弊端，追诉程序存在诸多缺陷，直接影响到现行庭审方式的有效运作。而且现行强职权主义侦查模式所具有的封闭性、非诉讼性、专权性与控辩式庭审方式的推行以及诉讼民主化趋势与公民权利保障等法治理念也是相悖的。在当前大力推进司法改革的情势下，应是解决这些问题的契机。为此，本文