职务犯罪侦查强制取证权研究

发布时间：2018-11-18 11:45

【摘要】：腐败问题关乎国家存亡，因此反腐败一直是一个国家非常重视的问题，职务犯罪侦查在反腐败中也扮演着越来越重要的角色。职务犯罪主体的特定性以及社会危害的严重性等特点，决定了其不同于其他普通的刑事犯罪案件，具有特殊性。新阶段的职务犯罪侦查实践中，职务犯罪侦查难、取证难的问题表现得越来越明显，世界各国也大都对职务犯罪侦查作出了特殊的规定，赋予了职务犯罪侦查机关更加充分的侦查权。与世界各国职务犯罪特别侦查权配置的一般趋势相比，我国现行法律对职务犯罪侦查权的规定还不完善，职务犯罪侦查权的配置存在严重缺陷，比如取证权的强制性不足、技术侦查权和秘密侦查权法律依据的缺失等，这些存在的问题都严重影响了侦查能力和侦查效率，难以适应现阶段打击职务犯罪的需要。另外，现在保护人权的呼声越来越高，但是相应的控制犯罪的手段并没有得到加强，所以强化职务犯罪侦查权的配置就显得更加急迫。因此法律应该赋予职务犯罪侦查机关更加充分的侦查权，主要就是特别侦查权，例如秘密侦查、技术侦查、强制取证权等，对于秘密侦查权和技术侦查权，我国法律也有相关的规定，主要是在内部规章中作了规定，但是对于强制取证权，我国法律法规并没有相关的规定。本文参考国内相关研究成果，对强制取证权的一般考察作了相关介绍，并主要就英国和美国关于强制取证权的规定，作了比较详细的介绍，在这些比较研究的基础上，结合我国目前关于职务犯罪侦查权力配置的现状，就我国职务犯罪侦查机关配置强制取证权的必要性和可能性作了相关的探讨，并提出了在我国配置强制取证权的建议和初步方案。
[Abstract]:The problem of corruption is related to the survival of a country. Therefore, anti-corruption has always been a matter of great importance to a country. The investigation of job-related crimes also plays an increasingly important role in the fight against corruption. The particularity of the subject of duty crime and the seriousness of social harm determine that it is different from other ordinary criminal cases and has its particularity. In the practice of duty crime investigation in the new stage, the problem of the difficulty of duty crime investigation and the difficulty of obtaining evidence is becoming more and more obvious. Most countries in the world have made special provisions on the duty crime investigation. The investigation organ of duty crime is given more full investigation power. Compared with the general trend of the allocation of special investigation powers for job-related crimes in various countries in the world, the provisions of the existing laws on the investigation power of job-related crimes in our country are not perfect, and the allocation of the investigation powers for job-related crimes has serious defects, such as the mandatory deficiency of the power to obtain evidence. The lack of legal basis of technical investigation power and secret investigation power, these existing problems have seriously affected the investigation ability and efficiency, so it is difficult to adapt to the need of cracking down on duty crime at the present stage. In addition, the voice of protecting human rights is becoming higher and higher, but the corresponding means of crime control have not been strengthened, so it is more urgent to strengthen the allocation of duty crime investigation power. Therefore, the law should give duty crime investigation organs more full powers of investigation, mainly special investigative powers, such as secret investigation, technical investigation, compulsory forensics, etc., for secret investigation and technical investigation. There are also relevant provisions in our law, mainly in the internal regulations, but there are no relevant provisions for the compulsory right to obtain evidence. Referring to the relevant domestic research results, this paper introduces the general investigation of the compulsory forensics right, and mainly introduces the provisions of the compulsory forensics right in the United Kingdom and the United States. On the basis of these comparative studies, this paper makes a detailed introduction. Combined with the present situation of the power allocation of duty crime investigation in our country, this paper discusses the necessity and possibility of the compulsory right of collecting evidence in the investigation organ of duty crime in our country. It also puts forward some suggestions and preliminary plans for the allocation of compulsory forensics right in our country.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D918;D924.393

【参考文献】