卷证并送主义下的公诉审查程序之构建——兼评《刑事诉讼法》第172条、第181条  

Construction on the Public Prosecution Censorship System from the Perspective of Conveyance of All Dossiers——Comment on Article 172 and 181 in the Criminal Procedure Law

作　　者：刘晶[1] 

机构地区：[1]武汉大学法学院,湖北武汉430072

出　　处：《河北法学》2014年第6期174-181,共8页Hebei Law Science

基　　金：2012年度国家社会科学基金青年项目<刑事程序法的功能研究>(12CFX044)的阶段性研究成果

摘　　要：我国两次刑事诉讼法修改中,公诉审查制度都被虚置化。根据新刑事诉讼法(以下简称新法)第172条的规定,检察机关在提起公诉时必须向法院移送所有的"案卷材料与证据",从而重回79旧刑事诉讼法卷证并送主义的旧路。同时,该法第181条规定,只要起诉书中有明确的指控犯罪事实,法院就得照单全收,开庭审判,庭前预断似乎成为必然。我国庭前预断问题的根源,在于独立的公诉审查程序的缺失,对公诉权的运作缺乏有效制约。公诉审查制度采用卷证并送主义是当今世界法治国家的必然选择,以此为基础,立足本土国情,科学地构建我国刑事公诉审查程序,才能真正地解决庭前预断之顽疾。In the two Criminal procedure law revisions, the public Prosecution Censorship System hasn＇t been established. According to Article 172 of the new criminal procedure law, the procuratorial organ must transfer all the case files and evidence in public prosecution which returns to the old road determined in 1979. At the same time, according to Article 18l, so long as there are clear criminal facts in indictment, the court must accept all the case files and evidence and then trial the case. There is no doubt that this situation will lead to prognosis before the court. The reason is that we lack the independent public Prosecution Censorship Procedure and restriction mechanism on the right of public prosecution. Almost all the countries under the rule of law realize that the public： Prosecution Censorship System must use the way of conveyance of all dossiers, Only based on this consensus, we can establish the public Prosecution Censorship System scientifically suited our situation and settle the prognosis in the end.

关 键 词：刑事诉讼法 卷证并送主义 公诉权 庭前预断 公诉审查 

分 类 号：DF73[政治法律—诉讼法学]