检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:陈凤超[1]
出 处:《当代法学》2007年第5期86-90,共5页Contemporary Law Review
摘 要:传统的刑事诉讼理论将刑事诉讼法作为刑法的附属法,刑事诉讼法的价值一直被视为一元化的工具价值。现代社会是价值多元的社会,刑事诉讼法已被视为多元价值的结合体。但是,在价值多元的立法需求条件下,刑事诉讼制度设计采取多点定位的思维方式必然导致价值冲突调整失序,刑事诉讼法内在价值的和谐性和制度设计的逻辑统一性无法完美的实现。因而,确立程序公正为刑事诉讼立法的基准价值,既赋予刑事诉讼法以独立的法治价值地位,有助于推进刑事法治,又为解决刑事诉讼立法技术方面的困难,提供了明确的指导原则和程序设计考量标准。Traditional theory of criminal procedure sees criminal procedure law as appendix of criminal law, the value of criminal procedure law is seen as only a tool. Modem society is a multiple value society, and criminal procedure law is seen as a combination of multiple values. However, under the condition of multiple values for legislation, the designation of the system of criminal procedure will result in conflict of values without orderly adjustment, and the inherent value unification could not be realized. Therefore, setting procedural justice as the basic value of criminal procedural law, is helpful to make criminal procedure law as a independent legal branch, and to promote criminal rule of law. It is also helpful to solve technical problems in criminal procedure legislation, and provide a clear guideline and criteria for procedure designation.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.170