主观还是客观:诱惑侦查合法性的标准  

Subjectivity or Objectivity: On the Legitimacy Criteria of Temptation Investigation

作　　者：魏汉涛[1] 郭建龙 

机构地区：[1]昆明理工大学法学院,云南昆明650500 [2]山东省德州市夏津县人民检察院,山东夏津253200

出　　处：《海南大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2013年第5期68-74,共7页Journal of Hainan University （Humanities & Social Sciences）

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学西部和边疆地区青年基金项目(12XJC820001);昆明理工大学引进人才项目(KKSY201224012)

摘　　要：诱惑侦查是一把双刃剑,用之不当会陷无辜者于罪。为避免诱惑侦查的负面效果,必须廓清其合法与非法的界限。在美国,关于诱惑侦查合法性的界限,理论上有主观标准与客观标准之争,前者着眼于被告人的可谴责性,后者专注于警察引诱行为的不适当性。事实上,主观标准与客观标准并非一山不能容二虎的关系,而是具有互补性。借鉴美国的理论与实践,我国宜吸收主观标准和客观标准之长,采"并列模式"规制诱惑侦查行为,禁止犯意引诱,严格限制引诱程度和引诱对象,并授予被告人对非法的诱惑侦查作无罪抗辩的权利。The temptation investigation is a double-edged sword, whose improper use will make the innocent in-volved in the crime. To avoid the negative effects of temptation investigation, it is a must to demarcate its legali-ty. In the United States there exist the theoretical disputes over the subjective criteria and objective ones in terms of the legitimate boundary of temptation investigation. While the former considers the condemnation of the de-fendant, the later emphasizes the inappropriateness of the police＇ s tempting behavior. In fact the relationship between the two standards is not one or the other, but complementary. With reference to the American theory and practice, China should take advantage of the subjective and objective criteria and adopt the parallel mode to regulate the temptation investigation, prohibiting the intentional temptation and strictly limiting the extent and ob-ject of temptation while entitling the defendant to the right of the plea of innocence over the illegal temptation in- vestigation.

关 键 词：诱惑侦查 合法界限 客观标准 主观标准 

分 类 号：DF793[政治法律—诉讼法学]