人身安全保护令在家暴防治中的适用问题研究

发布时间：2018-03-27 13:29

本文选题：人身安全保护令　切入点：证明责任　出处：《河南师范大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：家庭暴力是国际上一个热点问题,一直以来我国都存在家庭暴力问题,而且近几年来,人们的维权意识高涨,自我保护能力提高,家庭暴力日益浮出水面,经过调查研究发现其他国家用人身安全保护令来防治家庭暴力。人身安全保护令就是指在受害者遭受家庭暴力或者是有面临家庭暴力的危险,可以向法院申请保护,法院经过审理作出裁定。虽然为了指导司法实践,2008年公布了《涉及家庭暴力婚姻案件审理指南》(以下简称《审理指南》)。在《审理指南》中第一次对于人身安全保护裁定的申请条件、签发条件等做出了规定,为签发人身安全保护裁定提供了一定的参考,但是受该指南性质所限,法官不能直接援引指南作为判决或裁定的依据。2012年修订的《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》(以下简称《民事诉讼法》)首次规定了行为保全,人身安全保护令被看成是一种行为保全,在立法上被肯定。但是由于新修订的《民事诉讼法》对于行为保全的规定过于原则,在司法实践上并不能起到良好的指导作用。为了完善我国的家庭暴力防治法律体系,全国人民代表大会常务委员会表决通过了《中华人民共和国反家庭暴力法》(以下简称《反家庭暴力法》),该法对人身安全保护令进行了专章规定,将人身安全保护令作为一个独立程序,不再依附于婚姻家庭案件的诉讼程序,这可谓是《反家庭暴力法》立法之进步,同时明确规定了人身安全保护令的申请人范围、申请形式、管辖法院、内容,以及执行方式与法律责任。纵观人身安全保护令在司法适用中的情况可以发现,人身安全保护令的法律规定还存在诸多缺陷,当有证据表明家庭暴力事实存在时,受害者因为某种原因撤回了人身安全保护令的申请,想给予施暴者一次改正的机会,想尽力维护婚姻关系的存续,但是施暴者并未认识到错误,那么针对施暴者的家庭暴力行为,受害者是否还可以再次提出人身安全保护令的申请。另外立法并未对人身安全保护令的证明规则进行详细的规定,受害者一般都是弱势群体,由于证据意识淡薄或者是能力有限而无法拥有充足的证据,而针对人身安全保护令的申请,法律规定的证明标准与证明责任对受害者来说又过于严苛,受害者若没有充足的证据去证明家庭暴力事实,法院无法作出人身安全保护令的裁定,其将无法得到人身安全保护令的保护。防治家庭暴力的人身安全保护令制度存在缺陷,有问题就去解决问题,本文的目的就是为了针对问题提出建议,文章通过对我国现有的有关人身安全保护令的法律规定和司法实践存在的不足之处进行说明,查找国外关于人身安全保护令中值得借鉴的立法规定和司法实践,完善我国的人身安全保护令。笔者建议针对同一家庭暴力行为,受害者撤回申请后可以再次提出申请;对于证明规则部分,笔者建议适用举证责任倒置原则,采用微弱优势证明标准。并且笔者提倡将品格证据作为补强证据的一种,以此来改善受害者与施暴者之间的能力不均等的情况,平衡双方的能力。
[Abstract]:Family violence is a significant issue in the world, has been in China since there are problems of domestic violence, and in recent years, rising awareness of people's rights, improve the ability to protect themselves, family violence has surfaced, after investigation found that other countries with personal safety protection order to prevent domestic violence. Personal safety protection that means victims of family violence or are in danger of domestic violence, can apply for protection to the court, after hearing the court ruling. In order to guide the judicial practice, published in 2008 "domestic violence involving marriage case Guide (hereinafter referred to as the" trial guidelines > >). < > in the first trial in the guide for personal safety protection order the conditions for issuing conditions make the rules, provide some reference for the issue of personal safety protection order, but due to the limited nature of the guide, The judge cannot directly invoke the People's Republic of China Civil Procedure Law > as a guide to the judgments or decisions on the basis of.2012 amendment "(hereinafter referred to as the" Civil Procedure Law ") for the first time the provisions of the act preservation, personal safety protection order has been regarded as a kind of act preservation, was affirmed in the legislation. But because of the civil litigation law" revised "provisions of the act preservation principle too, and can not play a good guidance in the judicial practice. In order to improve the domestic violence prevention law system in our country, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress voted through the" People's Republic of China anti domestic violence law "(hereinafter referred to as the" anti family violence law >), to protect the personal safety of the of people make the special regulations, the personal safety protection order as a separate program, no longer dependent on marriage and family proceedings, which can be described as "anti family violence law The legislative progress, also defined the scope of the applicant, the personal safety protection order of the application form, under the jurisdiction of the court, the content and mode of execution and legal liability. To protect the personal safety throughout the people make in judicial application can be found, the law of personal safety protection order, there are many defects, when there is evidence family violence exists that the victim for some reason to withdraw the application of personal safety protection order, the perpetrators want to give an opportunity to correct, try to maintain the marital relationship continues to exist, but the perpetrators did not recognize the error, then the perpetrators of domestic violence, whether the victim can also apply them again safety protection order. In addition to that legislation does not rule personal safety protection order detailed provisions, the victims are generally vulnerable groups, because the evidence consciousness or Is limited and can not have sufficient evidence, and to apply for personal safety protection order, the law standard of proof and the burden of proof for the victims and the victims are too severe, if there is no sufficient evidence to prove the facts of family violence, the court ruled to personal safety protection order, the people will not be protected personal safety protection order. The family violence prevention and control of personal safety protection order system defects, problem solving problem, the purpose of this paper is to put forward suggestions, the article illustrate the deficiencies of laws and regulations to protect the personal safety of our existing order and judicial practice, to find foreign about personal safety protection legislation reference order and judicial practice, improve the safety protection in our country. The author suggests that people make the same family violence, The victim after the withdrawal of the application can apply again; for rules of proof part, the author suggests the principles for burden of proof, the standard of proof. The author also narrowly advocates the character evidence as a corroborative evidence, so as to improve the ability between victims and perpetrators of the unequal situation, balance the ability of both sides.

【学位授予单位】：河南师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D923.9

【参考文献】