欧洲人权法院视角下非法诱惑侦查认定标准与法律后果——以“Akbay and others v Germany案”为例  

Identification Standard and llegal Consequences of Unlawful Entrapment from the Perspective of European Cort of Human Rights-According the Case of Akbay and Others v Germany

作　　者：兰梦茹 LAN Meng-ru(Southwest University of Political Science and Law,Chongqing 401120,China)

机构地区：[1]西南政法大学法学院,重庆401120

出　　处：《时代法学》2023年第3期108-116,F0003,共10页Presentday Law Science

基　　金：国家毒品问题治理研究中心项目“毒品犯罪中诱惑侦查的适用研究”(DR(2021)Y003);国家社会科学基金项目“刑事案件事实认定中的经验法则研究”(19BFX092)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：Akbay案裁决反映了欧洲人权法院在诱惑侦查问题上的态度,即诱惑侦查的非法性需从实体与程序两方面进行识别;非法间接诱惑侦查的认定应当以官方对共犯加入的可预见性、诱饵对行为人影响的决定性为标准。针对官方非法诱惑侦查行为,法律应当施以排除所有证据,或者终止程序等具有同等效果的法律后果。在国际社会毒品犯罪泛滥、全球应对毒品犯罪目标高度一致背景下,该立场反映了诱惑侦查规则发展的整体趋势,对我国诱惑侦查规则的完善有较大借鉴意义。立足本土法律资源与司法实践,区分非法直接诱惑侦查与非法间接诱惑侦查,明确非法诱惑侦查的认定标准与法律后果是促进诱惑侦查良性发展的必由之路。The verdict of Akbay case reflects the attitude of the European Court of Human Rights on entrapment,that is,the illegality of temptation investigation should be identified from two aspects:substantive and procedural standards;The cognizance of indirect temptation investigation should be based on the official predictability of complicity and the decisive influence of bait on the perpetrator.In view of the official illegal inductive investigate,the law should impose legal consequences with the same effect,such as excluding all evidence or terminating the procedure.Against the background of the proliferation of drug crimes in the international community and the global goal of dealing with drug crimes,this position reflects the overall trend of the development of inductive investigation rules,and has great reference significance for the improvement of inductive investigation rules in China.Starting from local legal resources and judicial practice,it is the only way to promote the benign development of temptation investigation by clarifying the identification standard and legal consequences of illegal temptation investigation.

关 键 词：直接诱惑侦查 间接诱惑侦查 认定标准 法律后果 补偿措施 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]