司法人员对待被告人翻供态度之深层原因探析
|
摘要
实证考察发现,司法人员对待被告人翻供总体呈现出排斥的态度,不利于保障人权和避免冤错案。究其原因,打击犯罪、维护社会稳定的需要与社会治理水平、侦查技术含量低下之间的矛盾,有罪推定的侦查思维、过分追求实体真实以及翻供真假难辨的固有属性,使得侦查人员在案件侦破前后对待被告人翻供态度迥异;诉讼结构的扭曲、批捕"绑架"公诉、内心确信与指控犯罪的考量以及个人意见与集体意见之间的矛盾,在一定程度上影响了批捕检察官和公诉人对待翻供的态度;流水线式的诉讼构造、规则逻辑与治理逻辑的妥协以及追求实体真实的裁判倾向,使得审判法官在程序上和实体上对待被告人翻供呈现双重面孔。
The empirical investigation show ed that the judicial personnel's overall attitude tow ards the defendants' retraction of confession is not conducive to protecting human rights and avoiding wrongful cases. The reasons for this is that the contradiction between the need to combat crime and maintain social stability and the level of social governance and the low level of detection technology,the investigative thinking of guilty presumption,the excessive pursuit of physical reality,and the intrinsic attributes of retraction of confession make the different attitudes of the investigators before and after the investigation; the distortion of the litigation structure,the public prosecution of arresting the"kidnapping",the inner conviction and the accusation of the crime,and the contradiction between individual opinions and collective opinions affect the attitudes of apprehensive procurators and public prosecutors to a certain extent; the constructive structure of the litigation,the compromise of the rule logic and the governance logic,and the tendency to pursue the real judgment of the entity make the trial judge treat the defendant's retraction of confession with a double face in a procedural and substantive form.
The empirical investigation show ed that the judicial personnel's overall attitude tow ards the defendants' retraction of confession is not conducive to protecting human rights and avoiding wrongful cases. The reasons for this is that the contradiction between the need to combat crime and maintain social stability and the level of social governance and the low level of detection technology,the investigative thinking of guilty presumption,the excessive pursuit of physical reality,and the intrinsic attributes of retraction of confession make the different attitudes of the investigators before and after the investigation; the distortion of the litigation structure,the public prosecution of arresting the"kidnapping",the inner conviction and the accusation of the crime,and the contradiction between individual opinions and collective opinions affect the attitudes of apprehensive procurators and public prosecutors to a certain extent; the constructive structure of the litigation,the compromise of the rule logic and the governance logic,and the tendency to pursue the real judgment of the entity make the trial judge treat the defendant's retraction of confession with a double face in a procedural and substantive form.
引文
(1)详见王海:“被告人翻供问题研究”,西南政法大学博士学位论文,2015年5月,第67-78页。
(2)参见左卫民、周洪波:“从合法到非法——刑讯逼供的语境分析”,《法学》,2002年第10期,第35-36页。
(1)[美]理查德·波斯纳:《法官如何思考》,苏力译,北京:北京大学出版社,2009年版,第37-39页。
(2)姚莉、冯喜恒:“犯罪控制模式下的法官决策”,《法学论坛》,2010年第1期,第11页。
(3)参见龙宗智:《庭审制度研究》,北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001年版,第112-113页。
(1)“三个至上”,即党的事业至上、人民利益至上、宪法和法律至上;“三个效果”,即政治效果、法律效果和社会效果。
(2)参见孙晓玉:“刑事审判中的被告人翻供问题——从裁判者角度出发的分析”,载《西南民族大学学报》(人文社会科学版),2012年第10期,第110页。
(1)[德]托马斯·魏根特:《德国刑事诉讼程序》,岳礼玲、温小洁译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004年版,第187-188页。
(2)参见左卫民、周洪波:“从合法到非法——刑讯逼供的语境分析”,《法学》,2002年第10期,第35-36页。
(1)[美]理查德·波斯纳:《法官如何思考》,苏力译,北京:北京大学出版社,2009年版,第37-39页。
(2)姚莉、冯喜恒:“犯罪控制模式下的法官决策”,《法学论坛》,2010年第1期,第11页。
(3)参见龙宗智:《庭审制度研究》,北京:中国政法大学出版社,2001年版,第112-113页。
(1)“三个至上”,即党的事业至上、人民利益至上、宪法和法律至上;“三个效果”,即政治效果、法律效果和社会效果。
(2)参见孙晓玉:“刑事审判中的被告人翻供问题——从裁判者角度出发的分析”,载《西南民族大学学报》(人文社会科学版),2012年第10期,第110页。
(1)[德]托马斯·魏根特:《德国刑事诉讼程序》,岳礼玲、温小洁译,北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004年版,第187-188页。