美国的“政治大棒”与德国的法律程序——后“9·11”时代,美德反恐国际合作第一案之解读  

American Political Poker and German Legal Procedure——Post-"9·11"Era,to Comprehend the First Anti-terrorism Case between USA and German

作　　者：杨小敏[1] 戚建刚[1] 

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学法学院

出　　处：《南京大学法律评论》2010年第1期275-290,共16页Nanjing University Law Review

基　　金：国家社科基金青年项目"行政应急权力的要素及其制约机制研究"(08CFX015)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要："9·11"事件后,德美看似亲密的反恐合作关系却在德国法院审判"9·11"事件中的国际恐怖嫌疑分子穆特萨迪格和穆祚迪案中陷入了困境。两国政府在反恐策略上的差异为这两个案件的结局规定了方向。德国政府部门拒绝向德国法院提供关键证据,损害了德国检察官的指控能力。美国政府拒绝与德国法院合作,则直接冒犯了德国法院的自尊。由于审判是在德国民众反对美国入侵伊拉克以及阿尔布莱格监狱丑闻之爆发的背景下进行的,德国公共舆论同情被告人,积极影响并支持了法院的判决。这两个案件可以视为德国法院及民众对布什政府所实施的反恐策略的一次大审判,判决结果是布什政府败诉。After the 9·11 affair,the seemingly good relations of anti-terrorism between USA and German has fallen into the dilemma as the German courts judged the international suspected terrorists—Motassadeq and Mzoudi.The differences of the anti-terrorism tactics between the two countries has provided the direction of the results of the two cases.The government departments of German refused to hand over key evidences to the courts of German,which impairing the accused ability of the prosecutors of German.USA government refused to cooperate with the courts of German,which insulting the courts of German.As the judgments were going on under the background of USA invading Iraq and the Abu-Ghraib torture scandal broken out,the public opinion sympathized with the accused and supported the courts of German.It is argued that the two case can be seen the court of German and the people of German judged the anti-terrorism tactics of Bush Government of USA.The result is the failure of the Bush Government.

关 键 词：恐怖主义 德国 美国 穆特萨迪格案 穆祚迪案 

分 类 号：D771.2[政治法律—政治学] D951.6[政治法律—中外政治制度]