检察官客观义务的基本矛盾及其应对

发布时间：2018-04-23 05:24

本文选题：检察制度 + 检察官　；参考：《四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版)》2014年04期

【摘要】：检察官履行客观义务,存在内在矛盾和外部冲突。包括检察官作为控方当事人的角色与其作为司法官员的客观公正和中立性的矛盾,以及强化检察官客观义务所产生的关联效应,即由认可检察官优越地位,到强化职权主义的刑事诉讼构造,可能妨碍诉讼结构的平衡。解决以上矛盾在理论与实务上有不同路径选择。过高估计检察官承担客观义务的能力以及客观义务论的价值不符合刑事诉讼现实,同时应警惕客观义务论所跟进的制度安排,防止其破坏刑事诉讼的合理构造。但客观义务论仍是抑制"必要之恶"的有用设置,关键应当防止客观义务空洞化,因此应在客观义务本身的制度安排以及外部制度设置上作双向努力。
[Abstract]:Public prosecutors fulfill objective obligations, there are internal contradictions and external conflicts. Including the contradiction between the prosecutor's role as a party to the prosecution and his objectivity, impartiality and neutrality as a judicial official, as well as the related effect of strengthening the objective obligation of the prosecutor, that is, the recognition of the superior position of the prosecutor. To strengthen the power of the criminal procedure structure, may hinder the balance of the litigation structure. There are different ways to solve these contradictions in theory and practice. Overestimating the ability of public procurators to undertake objective obligations and the value of objective obligation theory are not in line with the reality of criminal procedure. At the same time, we should be alert to the institutional arrangements followed by objective obligation theory and prevent them from undermining the reasonable structure of criminal proceedings. But the theory of objective obligation is still a useful setting to restrain "necessary evil". The key is to prevent the void of objective obligation, so we should make a two-way effort on the institutional arrangement of objective obligation itself and on the setting of external system.
【作者单位】：四川大学法学院;
【基金】：四川大学中央高校基本科研业务费研究专项(哲学社会科学项目)——学科前沿与交叉创新重点项目资助
【分类号】：D926.3

【参考文献】