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:张晶 Zhang Jing(Law School, People’s Public Security University of China, Beijing 100038, China)
机构地区:[1]中国人民公安大学法学院
出 处:《铁道警察学院学报》2019年第4期74-79,共6页Journal of Railway Police College
摘 要:法国预审以追求案件客观真实和惩罚犯罪为主要价值目标,为了实现分权制衡,防止预审法官权力过分集中,该制度从创立开始一直处于改革之中,预审法官的角色也在发生改变。关于预审法官仍存在诸多争议:一是预审法官同时享有侦查权和司法审查权;二是预审法官的权力过大且过于集中,制约机制明显不足;三是预审法官都是由法官组成,没有专门的侦查人员。法国预审制度应改变侦查权和司法审查权过于集中的状态,实现诉审分离。The pre-trial in France takes case objectivity and criminal punishment as its priority to realize the decentralization or prevent the over-centralized power of pre-trial judges. Since its establishment, the pre-trial practice has been in reform and changes, so is the role of pre-trial judges. There are many disputes on the judges, for they have the power of investigation and judicial review at the same time. Secondly, the power of pre-trial judges is centralized and maybe overused without a restriction mechanism. Thirdly, the pre-trial judges are mainly from judges, not professional investigators. The power centralization of investigation and judicial review in French pre-trial should be changed to separate suing from the trial.
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:216.73.216.15