司法职务犯罪侦查权也应当转隶监委

The Investigation Power of Judicial Duty Crime Should Also Be Transferred to the National Supervisory Committee

成果信息
DC信息
传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者：

高一飞

归属院系：

法学院

作者：

高一飞1

摘要：

保留检察机关司法职务犯罪侦查权的理由主要有两点:一是认为这是为检察机关诉讼监督提供后盾的需要,二是认为检察机关拥有侦查权是世界通行做法。但是,检察机关行使司法职务犯罪侦查权具有严重局限:无法解决自侦自捕自诉自我监督的难题;如果检察机关拥有侦查权,也应当以存在第三方监督为条件;所谓能让"诉讼监督更有力"也只是一种虚幻的想象;检察机关行使司法职务犯罪侦查权存在现实困难。监委行使司法职务犯罪侦查权具有特殊的优势:一是监委调查司法职务犯罪更加高效权威,二是监委调查司法职务犯罪更加独立中立。检察机关大部分职务犯罪侦查权转隶监委后,依然保留司法职务犯罪侦查权,既不合理,也无必要。立法机关应当理性看待检察机关司法职务犯罪侦查权的立法根据和实践效果,将其继续转隶到监委。

出版日期：

2020-01-05

学科：

诉讼法学

提交日期：

2020-07-22

引用参考：

高一飞. 司法职务犯罪侦查权也应当转隶监委[J]. 河南财经政法大学学报,2020(01):1-9.

  • dc.title
  • 司法职务犯罪侦查权也应当转隶监委
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 高一飞
  • dc.contributor.author
  • Gao Yifei;Southwest University of political science and law
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 西南政法大学诉讼法与司法改革研究中心
  • dc.publisher
  • 河南财经政法大学学报
  • dc.publisher
  • Journal of Henan University of Economics and Law
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2020
  • dc.identifier.issue
  • 01
  • dc.identifier.volume
  • v.35;No.177
  • dc.identifier.page
  • 1-9
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2020-01-05
  • dc.subject
  • 司法职务犯罪;检察机关;侦查权;诉讼监督;监察委员会
  • dc.subject
  • judicial duty crime;procuratorial organ;investigation power;litigation supervision;National Supervisory Committee
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 保留检察机关司法职务犯罪侦查权的理由主要有两点:一是认为这是为检察机关诉讼监督提供后盾的需要,二是认为检察机关拥有侦查权是世界通行做法。但是,检察机关行使司法职务犯罪侦查权具有严重局限:无法解决自侦自捕自诉自我监督的难题;如果检察机关拥有侦查权,也应当以存在第三方监督为条件;所谓能让"诉讼监督更有力"也只是一种虚幻的想象;检察机关行使司法职务犯罪侦查权存在现实困难。监委行使司法职务犯罪侦查权具有特殊的优势:一是监委调查司法职务犯罪更加高效权威,二是监委调查司法职务犯罪更加独立中立。检察机关大部分职务犯罪侦查权转隶监委后,依然保留司法职务犯罪侦查权,既不合理,也无必要。立法机关应当理性看待检察机关司法职务犯罪侦查权的立法根据和实践效果,将其继续转隶到监委。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • There are two main reasons for retaining the investigation power of the judicial duty crime in the procuratorial organ:one is that it is the need to provide support for the litigation supervision of the procuratorial organ;the other is that the procuratorial organ has the investigation power,which is a common practice in the world.However,the procuratorial organ has serious limitations in exercising the investigation power of Judicial Duty Crime:it is unable to solve the problem of self-supervision of self-investigation and self-arrest;if the procuratorial organ has the investigation power,it should also be conditional on the existence of third-party supervision;the so-called "more powerful litigation supervision" is only an illusion;the procuratorial organ has practical difficulties in exercising the investigation power of judicial duty crime.There are special advantages for the National Supervisory Committee to exercise the investigation power of judicial crimes:first,the National Supervisory Committee is more efficient and authoritative in investigating judicial crimes;second,the National supervisory committee is more independent and neutral in investigating judicial crimes.It is neither reasonable nor necessary for the procuratorial organ to retain the investigation power of judicial duty crime after transferring most of the investigation power of duty crime to the National Supervisory Committee.The legislature should rationally view the legislative basis and practical effect of the investigation power of the judicial duty crime of the procuratorial organ and transfer it to the National supervisory committee.
  • dc.description.sponsorshipPCode
  • 201717SFB1006;201818BFX078
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • 2017年度司法部重点课题“优化司法机关职权配置研究”(项目编号:17SFB1006);2018年度国家社科基金课题“看守所法立法研究”(项目编号:18BFX078)的阶段性研究成果
  • dc.description.sponsorshipsource
  • 国家社会科学基金
  • dc.identifier.CN
  • 41-1420/Z
  • dc.identifier.issn
  • 2095-3275
  • dc.identifier.if
  • 0.706
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D925.2
回到顶部