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:庄汉[1]
出 处:《湖北警官学院学报》2016年第3期40-46,共7页Journal of Hubei University of Police
摘 要:警察行使盘查权直接牵涉宪法规定的人身自由权、财产权、住宅权等公民基本权利。依循法治原则,我国当前盘查权的行使存在着制度缺失和行为失范两个方面的问题。盘查权走向规范化、法制化必须克服两个难点:一是行政强制与刑事侦查行为的界分,二是行使盘查权核心法律要件"合理怀疑"的相对确定化。改进和完善警察行使盘查权的路径在于:立法的精细化;告知理由、听取意见、搜查令、检察监督等程序规制的具体化;行政复议、行政诉讼、行政赔偿、行政补偿等多元化法律救济途径的构建。The police interrogation and check directly involves constitutional fundamental rights of citizens such as the right of personal liberty, property right, the right to adequate housing. According to the principle of rule of law, there exist institutional deficiency and behavior anomie in police interrogation and check. The standardization and legislation of police interrogation and check should overcome two difficulties: one is the demarcation of administrative enforcement and criminal investigation, the other is the relative certainty of"reasonable doubt" as a core legal requirement. The path to improve police interrogation and check includs detailed legislation, specific procedural regulation such as informing reasons, listening to suggestions, search warrant, prosecutorial supervision, diversified legal advocacy channels such as administrative recon- sideration, administrative proceedings, administrative compensation, administrative recuperation.
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:216.73.216.145