论程序性监督之嬗变——从违法性宣告到渐进式制裁  

The Transmutation of Procedural Supervision: From Illegality Declaration to Progressive Sanction

作　　者：郭晶[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院,北京100871

出　　处：《现代法学》2014年第1期94-107,共14页Modern Law Science

摘　　要：2012年修订的《刑事诉讼法》第47、55、115条所确立的检察官对警察三类程序性违法行为提出纠正意见的程序合法性监督机制,仅止步于程序性违法的识别与宣告,既无法对违法主体施以实质威慑,也难以向被侵权人提供及时救济。在我国刑事司法运作逻辑下,借由制度的微调和实务的演进,违法性宣告可逐步与非法证据排除等程序性处分措施建立实质性联系。借此,完整意义上的程序性制裁被渐进式地分布于后续所有程序合法性审查环节,从而实现多元审查主体之间的风险分散、责任共担和压力缓解。中国特色的渐进式程序,既可有效协调警、检、法职业利益,使之形成遏制侦查程序违法行为的合力,也可成为积累判例和提炼经验的平台,为实务演进提供助益。The procedural supervision mechanism established in Article 47, 55 and 115 of Criminal Proce- dure Law （2012） , i.e. prosecutors shall require police correct three types of illegal practices in procedure, on- ly limits to the identification and declaration of illegal practices in procedure which cannot deter the person who commits the illegal practices in procedure and cannot provide timely remedy to the victims of the illegal prac- tices in procedure. Under China＇ s criminal justice practices, the declaration process can gradually relate to ex- clusion of illegally obtained evidences through Therefore, a complete procedural sanction can minor adjustment of legislation and the progress of practices be scattered in all subsequent procedural supervision stages in a gradual manner, which can achieve the goal of risk and responsibility sharing and pressure release. This pro- gressive approach can not only accommodate departmental interests of police, prosecutor and judge, which can form a concerted force to prevent any illegal practices in investigation stage, but provide a platform for the accu- mulation of cases and experiences and benefit the process of progressive practices.

关 键 词：程序性违法 纠正意见 程序性制裁 司法考评 责任豁免 

分 类 号：DF73[政治法律—诉讼法学]