庭审阶段补充侦查制度合理性省思——以审判中心主义为背景  

Reflection on the Rationality of Supplementary Investigation Procedure in the Trial Stage:Against the Background of Trial Centrism

作　　者：韩旭[1] Han Xu

机构地区：[1]四川大学法学院,四川省司法制度改革研究基地

出　　处：《法商研究》2022年第1期71-84,共14页Studies in Law and Business

摘　　要：庭审阶段的补充侦查制度是职权主义诉讼结构和"侦查中心主义"的产物,其理念是追求"实体真实"。该制度不符合当前以审判为中心的刑事诉讼制度改革的精神,有违控辩平衡的诉讼原则,也不利于保障被告人的人权,导致司法资源浪费和诉讼效率降低,且有侦查权僭越审判权之嫌。针对上述弊端,结合检察机关正在实行的以"案-件比"为中心的考核机制,宜尽快废除庭审阶段的补充侦查制度。作为补偿,应当赋予控辩双方平等的证据申请权,改由人民法院进行庭外调查,庭外调查的重点应是有利于被告人的证据。对于庭审阶段翻证的证人,不宜由侦查(调查)机关单方面询问核实,而应当通知其出庭作证。The supplementary investigation system in the trial stage is the product of the litigation structure of authority doctrine and "investigation centralism", and its idea is the pursuit of "substantive truth". This system does not accord with the spirit of the current trial-centered criminal procedure system reform.It violates the litigation principle of balance between charge and defense, and is not conducive to the protection of the defendant’s human rights, which leads to the waste of judicial resources and the reduction of litigation efficiency, and the investigation power overstepping the trial power. In view of the above disadvantages, combined with the assessment mechanism centered on the "case to case ratio" as the center, the supplementary investigation system in the trial stage should be abolished as soon as possible. As compensation, both parties of the prosecution and defense should be given an equal right to apply for evidence, and the people’s court should conduct an out-of-court investigation.For witnesses turned over at the trial stage, the investigation authorities should not unilaterally inquire and verify, but should notify them to testify in court.

关 键 词：庭审阶段 补充侦查制度 审判中心主义 控辩平衡 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]