公诉证明标准的实务困境与对策——析“段某等”故意杀人案  

The Predicament and Countermeasures of the Standard of Public Prosecution Proof Practice——Analysis of “Duan et al.” Intentional Homicide Case

作　　者：石达理[1] 

机构地区：[1]郑州轻工业学院政法学院,河南郑州450001

出　　处：《领导之友》2016年第15期41-47,共7页Leaders＇Companion

摘　　要：2012年新《刑事诉讼法》第53条对刑事案件证明标准作出新规定,"证据确实、充分"应当满足三方面的要求。司法实践中新证明标准适用引发撤回起诉、无罪判决情形增多,对公诉机关办案造成较大压力。究其原因,既有公、检、法三机关在证明标准认识上的差异,也有侦查机关证据收集方面的固有欠缺。因此,准确把握公诉证明标准,完善证明标准保障机制,是今后公诉实践应当着力提升的关键。In 2012, Article 53 of the new ＂Criminal Procedure Law＂ formulates a new standard for a criminal case to be proved, ＂the evidence is reliable and sufficient＂ should meet three requirements. In judicial practice, the application of the new proof standard leads to increase of withdraw charges, acquittal, and puts greater pressure on the public prosecution organ handling the case. The reason is that the public security organs, peo- ple＇ s procuratorate, court are differences in the understanding of the proof standard, and evidence collected by the investigating authorities are also inherently lacking. Therefore, accurately grasping the prosecution to prove standard, improving the certificate standard safeguard mechanism, is the key to the future of efforts to enhance the public prosecution practice.

关 键 词：刑事诉讼 证明标准 公诉实务 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]