完善检察案例指导制度的具体构想

发布时间：2018-05-28 13:30

本文选题：检察指导案例 + 同案不同处理　；参考：《山东大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：相似的刑事案件,有的对罪名认定差异较大,有的对是否批准逮捕认识不一致,有的还对诉与不诉存有不同意见。“同案不同处理”现象在检察机关以不同形式存在。在现实生活中,只要存在1%的处理结果失衡,对于个案当事人而言,也就意味着100%的不公平。同一法律对于同一事实有不同的解读和法律后果,其直接后果是导致司法公正的缺失。很多案件的当事人因为受到这种“不公正”的待遇,质疑司法的公正,从而引发社会矛盾。我国是成文法国家,受大陆法系的传统影响较深,不承认判例的法源地位,而成文法的滞后性和稳定性难以适应社会生活的发展,判例的灵活性和适时性能补充成文法的不足。全国检察系统每年依照事实和法律作出了数以万计的具有最后决断性和最大权威性的决定,这样一笔巨大的检察监督资源财富并未得到有效利用。近年来,判例的重要性引起了法学理论界和检察实务界的重视,提出构建我国检察案例指导制度的呼声越来越响,2010年7月29最高人民检察院第十一届检察委员会第四十次会议通过了《最高人民检察院关于案例指导工作的规定》,标志着检察案例指导制度的正式确立。为进一步深入贯彻落实此要求,充分发挥案例指导在检察工作中的作用,本文主要分四大部分来论证完善检察案例指导制度的具体构想。一、检察案例指导制度的概念。这一部分主要通过解读与其相关的制度的区别、检察案例指导的特点和类型,更深入了解检察案例指导制度,明确检察案例指导制度法律的效力。二、分析建立我国检察案例指导制度中存在的问题,以求建立适合中国检察发展的案例指导制度。三、提出细化检察案例指导创制机制的具体构想。从明确检察案例指导制度创制主体、指导案例选择标准及其选编程序来阐述,以推动检察案例指导制度的全面开展。四、建立检察案例指导的管理实施及相关配套机制,以保证检察案例指导制度可持性长远运行。
[Abstract]:In similar criminal cases, there is a great difference in the identification of charges, some have different views on whether to approve arrest, and some have different opinions on whether to sue or not to sue. The phenomenon of "different handling of the same case" exists in different forms in the procuratorial organs. In real life, as long as there is an imbalance of 1%, it means 100% unfairness to the party involved in the case. The same law has different interpretations and legal consequences for the same fact, and its direct consequence is the lack of judicial justice. Because of the unfair treatment, the litigants in many cases question the justice of the judicature, which leads to social contradiction. China is a country of statutory law, which is deeply influenced by the tradition of civil law system, and does not recognize the status of jurisprudence as a source of law. However, the lag and stability of statutory law cannot adapt to the development of social life, and the flexibility and timely performance of precedents supplement the deficiency of statutory law. According to the facts and laws, the national procuratorial system makes tens of thousands of final and authoritative decisions every year, such a huge wealth of procuratorial supervision resources has not been effectively utilized. In recent years, the importance of jurisprudence has attracted the attention of the legal theorists and procuratorial practitioners. The voice of setting up the guiding system of procuratorial cases in our country is getting louder and louder. On July 29, 2010, the 40th meeting of the 11th Procuratorial Committee of the Supreme people's Procuratorate adopted the provisions of the Supreme people's Procuratorate on case guidance work. >, marking the formal establishment of the procuratorial case guidance system. In order to further carry out this request and give full play to the role of case guidance in the procuratorial work, this paper mainly divides into four parts to demonstrate the concrete idea of perfecting the procuratorial case guidance system. First, the concept of prosecutorial case guidance system. This part mainly through the interpretation of the differences between the relevant systems, the characteristics and types of procuratorial case guidance, more in-depth understanding of the procuratorial case guidance system, clear the effectiveness of the procuratorial case guidance system law. Second, it analyzes the problems existing in the establishment of China's procuratorial case guidance system in order to establish a case guidance system suitable for the development of China's procuratorial work. Third, put forward detailed procuratorial cases to guide the creation of specific ideas. In order to promote the overall development of the procuratorial case guidance system, it is expounded from defining the main body of the procuratorial case guidance system, guiding the selection standard of the case and its selection procedure. Fourth, establish the management and implementation of procuratorial case guidance and related supporting mechanisms to ensure the long-term operation of the procuratorial case guidance system.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D926.3

【参考文献】