我国刑事案件“异地管辖”模式探析  

A Probe on the Remote Jurisdiction Mode in Criminal Cases

作　　者：胡伟超[1] 曾友祥[1] 

机构地区：[1]华南理工大学法学院,广东广州510006

出　　处：《政法学刊》2015年第6期92-98,共7页Journal of Political Science and Law

基　　金：广东省哲学社会科学"十二五"规划学科共建项目(GD11XFX04)

摘　　要：刑事案件的"异地管辖"模式突破了刑事诉讼法对本地管辖的原则性规定,改由异地侦查、起诉或者审判机关实施管辖,目的在于消除本地侦查、起诉或者审判对案件审理公正性的不良影响,从而实现刑事诉讼实体公正和程序公正的双重目的。2012年刑事诉讼法第四十二条第二款在关于辩护人涉嫌犯罪案件的侦查机关的选择上明确规定由异地侦查机关实施侦查,开创了我国刑事诉讼领域对"异地管辖"模式的首次明确规定。但是,我国刑事诉讼法并未针对"异地管辖"模式在其他种类案件的适用方面做出原则性、一般性的规定,各地的司法实践标准不一致。同时,"异地管辖"模式的实施伴随着司法成本的提高、诉讼效率的降低和公民旁听权的侵害等等问题。因此,"异地管辖"模式必然在未来的司法实践过程中面临着进一步的改革与完善。The remote jurisdiction mode in criminal cases makes a breakthrough as to the local jurisdiction prescribed by Criminal Procedure Law. Remote investigation,lawsuit and trial can reduce the harmful effects caused by local investigation,lawsuit and trial. As a result,the dual purposes of substantive justice and procedural justice can be realized in criminal lawsuit. In 2012,Criminal Procedure Law clearly prescribed the mode of remote jurisdiction in criminal cases. However,Criminal Procedure Law did not prescribe whether the mode of remote jurisdiction can be applied to other cases,which leads to the different judicial practice in different regions.Meanwhile,the mode of remote jurisdiction will lead to the problems of high cost of justice,low efficiency of lawsuit and infringement on citizens＇ audit right. Therefore,the mode of remote jurisdiction shall be further reformed and improved in the future judicial practice.

关 键 词：刑事案件 “异地管辖”模式 “异地法官本地审” 

分 类 号：DF73[政治法律—诉讼法学]