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:袁小文
出 处:《中南大学学报(社会科学版)》2016年第2期61-66,共6页Journal of Central South University:Social Sciences
摘 要:理论界倡导保护被害人权利无可非议,但在主张通过提高被害人在公诉案件中的参与度来保障时,却遭遇了难以逾越的利害关系、难以承受的审理负担、难以解决的角色矛盾、难以判断的被害身份等诸多困境。这些困境主要是公诉案件诉讼功能的双重化、身份认识的简单化导致的。纯化公诉案件刑事诉讼功能,必须以被害人权利得到充分保护为前提,完善附带民事诉讼、完善司法救助制度可以有效保护被害人权利,并能将被害人参与公诉案件限制在合理的限度内。It is justifiable for theorists to advocate protecting victims’ rights, but numerous predicaments arise inpractice in protecting them by enhancing victims’ participation in public-prosecuting criminal cases. Predicamentsinclude insurmountable contradictions between victims’ desires and the aim of public-prosecuting criminal cases, theunbearable burdens of public hearing, the victims’ contradictory roles difficult to solve, and the victims’ identities hardto identify. These problems are caused by the double functions of the public-prosecuting criminal cases andsimplification of cognition of victims. The solutions to these problems lie in improving incidental civil action andjudicial relief system. Purifying the functions of the public-prosecuting criminal cases must be based on full protectionof the victims’ rights, perfection of affiliated civilian lawsuits and judicial relief system so as as to protect effectivelythe victims’ rights, and the reasonable control of the victims’ participation in public-prosecuting criminal cases.
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:216.73.216.179