【摘要】：檢察權(quán)的定位是檢察理論研究的一個(gè)基石性問題，它直接決定著檢察權(quán)下一步將如何優(yōu)化配置，關(guān)系著檢察機(jī)關(guān)在國家權(quán)力體系的位置，影響著司法體制的改革方向與價(jià)值取向。面對(duì)學(xué)界種種不同的學(xué)說與觀點(diǎn)，本文作者從我國實(shí)際國情出發(fā)，通過對(duì)比中外法律文化間的差異，對(duì)我國檢察權(quán)的定位問題提出了自己的看法和建議，以期對(duì)正在進(jìn)行的司法改革提供點(diǎn)滴借鑒。 第一部分，我國檢察權(quán)定位的理論分析。從目前世界各國的檢察權(quán)性質(zhì)理論研究現(xiàn)狀看，學(xué)術(shù)界主要有三種學(xué)說，即行政權(quán)說、司法權(quán)說和雙重屬性權(quán)說，三者均以“三權(quán)分立”為理論基礎(chǔ)，從行政權(quán)和司法的基本特性出發(fā)，對(duì)檢察權(quán)進(jìn)行歸類。針對(duì)我國檢察權(quán)的定位，國內(nèi)學(xué)者提出了第四種學(xué)說，即法律監(jiān)督權(quán)說，也是本文作者支持的學(xué)說。筆者認(rèn)為，無論是從東西方的對(duì)比，檢察制度的歷史演進(jìn)，檢察權(quán)的現(xiàn)實(shí)構(gòu)造，還是從檢察權(quán)的發(fā)展趨勢(shì)來看，檢察權(quán)都有其自身特殊性。具體而言，一是東西方定位各不相同，有行政權(quán)，有司法權(quán)，也有律監(jiān)督權(quán)；二是檢察權(quán)的地位具有特殊性，它是對(duì)原有權(quán)力的分立和整合，是一種特殊的權(quán)力類型；三是檢察權(quán)具有外溢性，即它已經(jīng)超出了原有的行政權(quán)或司法權(quán)的權(quán)力界限。因此，欲正確定位我國檢察權(quán)，就應(yīng)跳出西方三權(quán)分立理論束縛，立足我國的具體國情來對(duì)我國檢察權(quán)的定位進(jìn)行現(xiàn)實(shí)性分析。我國檢察權(quán)應(yīng)有的法律定位只能是法律監(jiān)督權(quán) 第二部分，我國檢察權(quán)定位面臨的現(xiàn)實(shí)問題。檢察權(quán)作為國家的法律監(jiān)督權(quán)在打擊各類犯罪、遏制官員腐敗、懲治瀆職侵權(quán)等方面發(fā)揮了積極的作用，但也存在著很多的問題和不足，一是實(shí)然權(quán)力與應(yīng)然權(quán)力間存在較大差異，具體表現(xiàn)在：監(jiān)督方式單一，主要是通過提請(qǐng)抗訴、發(fā)送糾正違法通知書、提出檢察建議等建議性的方式，收效十分有限，缺少更有力的監(jiān)督手段和方式；監(jiān)督內(nèi)容片面，主要集中于訴訟領(lǐng)域的監(jiān)督，即偵查活動(dòng)監(jiān)督、審判監(jiān)督和執(zhí)行監(jiān)督，并且規(guī)定模糊，對(duì)監(jiān)督的時(shí)間、方式、效力缺乏細(xì)化規(guī)定；監(jiān)督力度偏弱，受監(jiān)督方式的限制，致使監(jiān)督柔性過強(qiáng)，缺少保障監(jiān)督效果的剛性措施，導(dǎo)致監(jiān)督力度不大；前瞻性不強(qiáng)，現(xiàn)行的法律監(jiān)督主要集中于事后的已然性監(jiān)督，缺乏事前的未然性監(jiān)督，側(cè)重事后的懲處、缺乏事先的預(yù)警。二是政治地位的不對(duì)等。主要體現(xiàn)在依賴性過大，在人事任用管理、經(jīng)費(fèi)保障等方面幾乎完全依賴于同級(jí)黨委、政府，，在一些重大的案事件處理上，擺脫不掉政法委的干涉。 第三部分，我國法律監(jiān)督權(quán)的合理建構(gòu)。一是應(yīng)有權(quán)力的回歸。主動(dòng)監(jiān)督的權(quán)力，具體包括對(duì)人的監(jiān)督和對(duì)文的監(jiān)督，前者是指對(duì)已經(jīng)發(fā)生或可能發(fā)生重大瀆職案事件的相關(guān)責(zé)任人員進(jìn)行主動(dòng)制止、查處或處分建議權(quán)；后者是指對(duì)違法憲法或法律的有關(guān)規(guī)范性文件提請(qǐng)人大及其常委會(huì)進(jìn)行合憲與合法性審查的權(quán)力。爭議性案件的最終審查權(quán)，對(duì)當(dāng)今社會(huì)司法不公現(xiàn)象的頻出，當(dāng)事人對(duì)案件判決屢屢不服，上訪鬧訪現(xiàn)象嚴(yán)重等情況的不斷發(fā)生，充分發(fā)揮法律監(jiān)督機(jī)關(guān)的監(jiān)督作用，對(duì)爭議性案件進(jìn)行最終審查，促使審判機(jī)關(guān)作出更客觀公正的裁判，引導(dǎo)當(dāng)事人對(duì)案件處理結(jié)果權(quán)威性的服從。強(qiáng)化各種訴訟監(jiān)督權(quán)，完善監(jiān)督方式，強(qiáng)化監(jiān)督效果。二是柔性權(quán)力向剛性權(quán)力的過渡。通過立法賦予法律監(jiān)督機(jī)關(guān)有效的發(fā)現(xiàn)違法的手段，其中包括賦予檢察機(jī)關(guān)直接使用技術(shù)手段的權(quán)力、要求涉嫌職務(wù)犯罪的單位和知情人員提供有關(guān)案件的材料和證據(jù)的權(quán)力等；以法律的形式明確規(guī)定糾正違法通知書、檢察建議的適用情形、適用方式、適用效力，以及對(duì)拒不改正違法行為的處理辦法。三是監(jiān)督平臺(tái)的構(gòu)建。實(shí)行檢察機(jī)關(guān)的省以下垂直領(lǐng)導(dǎo)，檢察官由上級(jí)人大常委會(huì)統(tǒng)一任命；人事任用管理應(yīng)賦予更多自主權(quán)限，在檢察長人選的確定上，干部職級(jí)晉升等方面應(yīng)該賦予檢察機(jī)關(guān)更多自主權(quán)；加強(qiáng)監(jiān)督主體職業(yè)保障和榮譽(yù)感教育，提高和保障法律監(jiān)督主體人員的工資福利待遇、人身、人文等方面的特殊保障，提高職業(yè)榮譽(yù)感。
[Abstract]:The positioning of procuratorial power is a cornerstone of procuratorial theory research. It directly determines how to optimize the allocation of procuratorial power in the next step. It is related to the position of procuratorial organs in the state power system and affects the direction and value orientation of the reform of the judicial system. By comparing the differences between Chinese and foreign legal cultures, the author puts forward some opinions and suggestions on the positioning of procuratorial power in China, hoping to provide some references for the ongoing judicial reform.
The first part is the theoretical analysis of the localization of the procuratorial power in China.According to the present situation of the research on the nature of the procuratorial power in the world, there are three main theories in the academic circles, namely, the theory of administrative power, the theory of judicial power and the theory of dual-attribute power, all of which are based on the theory of separation of three powers and proceed from the basic characteristics of administrative power and judicial power. In view of the localization of the procuratorial power in our country, the domestic scholars put forward the fourth theory, namely the theory of legal supervision power, which is also supported by the author of this paper. Specifically speaking, the position of the East and the West is different, with administrative power, judicial power and legal supervision power; the status of the procuratorial power has its particularity, it is the separation and integration of the original power, is a special type of power; the third is that the procuratorial power has spillover, that is, it has gone beyond the original administrative power or judicial power. Therefore, in order to correctly orientate the procuratorial power of our country, we should jump out of the shackles of the theory of separation of powers in the West and analyze the positioning of the procuratorial power of our country based on the specific conditions of our country.
The second part is about the realistic problems faced by the position of procuratorial power in our country.As the legal supervision power of our country, procuratorial power plays an active role in cracking down on all kinds of crimes, curbing official corruption and punishing malfeasance infringement, but there are also many problems and shortcomings. Supervisory means are single, mainly by means of appealing for protest, sending notice of rectification of illegal acts, putting forward procuratorial suggestions, etc. The effect is very limited, lacking more powerful means and means of supervision; the content of supervision is one-sided, mainly concentrated in the field of litigation supervision, that is, supervision of investigation activities, supervision of trial and supervision of execution, and stipulated. Fuzzy, supervision of the time, way, effectiveness of the lack of detailed provisions; supervision is weak, limited by the way of supervision, resulting in supervision too flexible, lack of rigid measures to safeguard the effectiveness of supervision, resulting in supervision is not strong; prospective is not strong, the current legal supervision is mainly focused on ex post supervision, the lack of ex ante probabilities. The second is the unequal political status, which is mainly reflected in the excessive dependence on personnel appointment management, funding security and other aspects almost entirely rely rely rely rely on the Party committees at the same level, the government, in dealing with some major cases, can not get rid of the interference of the political and legal committees.
The third part is the reasonable construction of the legal supervision power in our country.The first is the return of the due power.The power of active supervision includes the supervision of people and the supervision of the text. The right of final examination of disputed cases, frequent occurrence of judicial injustice in today's society, frequent refusal of the parties to the judgment of the case, and serious petitions and petitions, etc. are constantly taking place, giving full play to the legal supervision organs. Supervisory role, the final review of disputed cases, to promote the judicial organs to make a more objective and impartial judgment, guide the parties to the authoritative submission of the outcome of the case. Strengthen various litigation supervision power, improve supervision methods, strengthen the supervision effect. Second, the transition from flexible power to rigid power. Effective means of discovering violations include giving procuratorial organs the right to use technical means directly, requiring units suspected of duty crimes and people with knowledge to provide relevant materials and evidence of the case, and so on. The third is the construction of the supervision platform. The procuratorial organs should be under the vertical leadership of the provincial level and the procurators should be appointed by the Standing Committee of the People's Congress at a higher level. More autonomy; strengthen the supervision of the main occupational security and sense of honor education, improve and protect the legal supervision of the main staff wages and welfare, personal, cultural and other special protection, improve the sense of professional honor.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D926.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳興良;限權(quán)與分權(quán):刑事法治視野中的警察權(quán)[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年01期

2 姜小川;;檢察權(quán)定位:檢察職權(quán)配置的關(guān)鍵[J];法學(xué)雜志;2011年09期

3 陳克方;;對(duì)我國檢察權(quán)定位與檢察改革的理性思考[J];法學(xué)與實(shí)踐;2010年01期

4 龍宗智;論檢察權(quán)的性質(zhì)與檢察機(jī)關(guān)的改革[J];法學(xué);1999年10期

5 謝鵬程;論檢察權(quán)的性質(zhì)[J];法學(xué);2000年02期

6 趙海蓉;;試論兩大法系檢察制度的差異及原因[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬刊);2010年08期

7 王戩;;我國檢察機(jī)關(guān)法律監(jiān)督的“特色”理解[J];河北法學(xué);2010年07期

8 韓成軍;;檢察權(quán)基本理論研究綜述[J];河南社會(huì)科學(xué);2010年02期

9 李昕;;俄羅斯檢察權(quán)配置的歷史變遷及其啟示[J];江西警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

10 陳衛(wèi)東;我國檢察權(quán)的反思與重構(gòu)——以公訴權(quán)為核心的分析[J];法學(xué)研究;2002年02期

本文編號(hào)：2199063