發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-27 23:01

  本文選題：刑事訴訟　切入點(diǎn)：違法所得　出處：《海南大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：聯(lián)合國大會(huì)在2003年審議通過的《聯(lián)合國反腐敗公約》中明確規(guī)定了未定罪案件的刑事沒收程序,此后各國（地區(qū)）相繼在他們的訴訟制度中規(guī)定了該程序。我國也借修訂《刑事訴訟法》之機(jī),從我國的實(shí)際出發(fā),并結(jié)合自身法律文化傳統(tǒng),在借鑒國外有關(guān)經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上,設(shè)立了犯罪嫌疑人、被告人逃匿或死亡案件違法所得沒收程序。2012年《刑事訴訟法》對(duì)該程序的規(guī)定僅有四條,內(nèi)容粗糙,在程序設(shè)計(jì)上較為抽象,雖然此后陸續(xù)出臺(tái)了相關(guān)的司法解釋,但違法所得沒收程序的許多內(nèi)容在適用上還存在問題,本文試圖分析該特別程序在適用上存在的問題與不足,進(jìn)而提出完善違法所得沒收程序的措施。 除了引言和結(jié)語外,正文分為四個(gè)部分,共約三萬余字。 第一部分主要介紹了違法所得沒收程序的一般理論,包括基本釋義、特征、意義。 第二部分集中分析了其他國家的違法所得沒收程序,在介紹完英美法系中美國民事沒收程序、英國民事追繳程序和澳大利亞犯罪收益追繳程序后,又對(duì)大陸法系的德國客觀訴訟程序、意大利保安處分制度和臺(tái)灣地區(qū)單獨(dú)沒收程序進(jìn)行了總結(jié)。最后,從這些域外考察中得出了一些啟示,以供我國違法所得沒收程序參考。 第三部分論述了我國違法所得沒收程序在適用過程中所存在的問題,主要有五個(gè)方面,分別是程序的申請(qǐng)主體不合理、沒收財(cái)產(chǎn)的界定不嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)、案件的適用范圍不明晰、舉證責(zé)任和證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不明確、權(quán)利的保障和救濟(jì)不完備。 第四部分論述了適用該程序應(yīng)遵循的基本原則,并基于第三部分的分析,進(jìn)一步提出解決問題的措施。在程序的申請(qǐng)主體上,應(yīng)當(dāng)賦予利害關(guān)系人的申請(qǐng)主體資格。設(shè)立激勵(lì)機(jī)制,鼓勵(lì)被追訴人的近親屬主動(dòng)申請(qǐng)；在沒收財(cái)產(chǎn)的界定上,非實(shí)體性財(cái)物應(yīng)當(dāng)納入到?jīng)]收的范圍內(nèi),針對(duì)混合財(cái)產(chǎn)的沒收要分情況處理,供犯罪所用的本人財(cái)物應(yīng)排除在沒收范圍之外；適用的案件類型應(yīng)做適當(dāng)且明確的擴(kuò)大,刪除“等重大犯罪案件”這些具有類推性質(zhì)的表述,不單單以案件的嚴(yán)重性和通緝時(shí)間來作為適用標(biāo)準(zhǔn)；利害關(guān)系人和檢察機(jī)關(guān)應(yīng)實(shí)行不同的證明標(biāo)準(zhǔn)；在權(quán)利的保障和救濟(jì)上,應(yīng)在公告通知方面做進(jìn)一步的修改,完善涉案財(cái)物的保全措施。
[Abstract]:The United Nations Convention against Corruption, which was considered and adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2003, clearly provides for criminal confiscation procedures in unconvicted cases, Since then, various countries (regions) have stipulated this procedure in their litigation systems one after another. China has also taken the opportunity of amending the Criminal procedure Law, proceeding from the reality of our country and combining its own legal and cultural traditions, on the basis of drawing lessons from the relevant experiences of foreign countries. The criminal suspect, the defendant escaped to hide or died of illegal income confiscation procedures. 2012 "Criminal procedure Law" on this procedure only four provisions, rough content, in the program design is more abstract, Although the relevant judicial explanations have been issued since then, there are still some problems in the application of many contents of the illegal income confiscation procedure. This paper tries to analyze the problems and deficiencies in the application of the special procedure. Further, the measures to perfect the procedure of confiscation of illegal income are put forward. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the text is divided into four parts, a total of about 30,000 words. The first part mainly introduces the general theory of illegal income confiscation procedure, including the basic interpretation, characteristics and significance. The second part focuses on the analysis of the illegal income confiscation procedures in other countries. After introducing the American civil confiscation procedure, the British civil recovery procedure and the Australian criminal proceeds recovery procedure in the common law system, the second part focuses on the analysis of the illegal income confiscation procedure in other countries. It also summarizes the objective proceedings in Germany, the system of security measures in Italy and the separate confiscation procedure in Taiwan. Finally, some revelations are drawn from these overseas investigations for the reference of the confiscation procedure of illegal income in our country. The third part discusses the problems existing in the procedure of illegal income confiscation in our country. There are five main aspects: the application subject of procedure is unreasonable, the definition of confiscation property is not strict, and the scope of application of cases is not clear. The burden of proof and standard of proof are not clear, and the protection and remedy of right are not complete. The fourth part discusses the basic principles to be followed in the application of the procedure, and based on the analysis of the third part, puts forward further measures to solve the problem. An incentive mechanism shall be established to encourage the close relatives of the accused to take the initiative to apply; in the definition of confiscated property, the non-physical property shall be included in the scope of confiscation, Confiscation of mixed property should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, and the personal property used for the crime should be excluded from the scope of confiscation; the applicable types of cases should be appropriately and explicitly expanded, The deletion of the analogous expression of "such major crime cases" should not be based solely on the seriousness of the case and the time of the wanted person as the applicable criterion; different standards of proof should be applied by interested parties and procuratorial authorities; In the aspect of protection and relief of rights, further modification should be made in the aspect of notice of announcement to perfect the preservation measures of property involved in the case.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：海南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王永杰;吳麗梅;;論我國未審沒收財(cái)產(chǎn)程序的不足與完善[J];東方法學(xué);2012年03期

2 田圣斌;麻愛民;;我國公訴案件缺席審判制度探析[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2008年04期

3 萬毅;;獨(dú)立沒收程序的證據(jù)法難題及其破解[J];法學(xué);2012年04期

4 孫煜華;;涉案財(cái)產(chǎn)沒收程序如何才能經(jīng)受憲法拷問[J];法學(xué);2012年06期

5 陳雷;;論我國違法所得特別沒收程序[J];法治研究;2012年05期

6 喬玲;;英國的民事追繳制度及其對(duì)我國的啟示[J];公安學(xué)刊(浙江警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2010年01期

7 初殿清;;違法所得沒收特別程序的性質(zhì)與案件范圍[J];法學(xué)雜志;2013年08期

8 黃風(fēng);;析《聯(lián)合國反腐敗公約》中文本第57條第3款的表述錯(cuò)誤[J];比較法研究;2010年01期

9 杜邈;;英國反恐立法的新發(fā)展[J];時(shí)代法學(xué);2009年05期

10 劉曉東;;簡論訴訟效率與程序公正之契合[J];黑龍江社會(huì)科學(xué);2009年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：1673622