English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  全文筆數/總筆數 : 49350/84014 (59%)
造訪人次 : 7261523      線上人數 : 57
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library & TKU Library IR team.
搜尋範圍 查詢小技巧:
  • 您可在西文檢索詞彙前後加上"雙引號",以獲取較精準的檢索結果
  • 若欲以作者姓名搜尋,建議至進階搜尋限定作者欄位,可獲得較完整資料
  • 進階搜尋
    請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: http://tkuir.lib.tku.edu.tw:8080/dspace/handle/987654321/30134


    題名: 兩岸檢察權之比較 : 以犯罪偵查為中心
    其他題名: The comparison of the prosecution between China and Taiwan : focus on the crime investigation
    作者: 范振中;Fan, Chen-chung
    貢獻者: 淡江大學中國大陸研究所碩士在職專班
    張五岳;Chang, Wu-ueh
    關鍵詞: 檢察官;檢察權;犯罪偵查;中國;   ;prosecutor;prosecution;crime investigation;China
    日期: 2009
    上傳時間: 2010-01-10 23:23:48 (UTC+8)
    摘要: 兩岸對打擊犯罪的合作,因牽涉司法主權等因素,實質往來多透過「點對點」的個人或社團間交流,並非通案性的管道,雙方亦未對彼此犯罪偵查制度全貌充分掌悉,進而擴大互助。因此,如何「求同存異」,秉持「同意歧見」精神,務實看待彼此的制度,透過整體性認知兩岸制度原貌,並釐清箇中差異所在,以此建立基礎,構築兩岸後續可長可久,有效穩固的交流合作,自屬重要。
    兩岸犯罪偵查於刑事程序的最終決定公訴與否者係檢察官,亦即控有公訴權的獨占性,且由檢察官擔負偵查的法律監督控制職責。故本文以文獻探討分析方法、歷史研究方法,以及比較研究歸納法,先透過文獻的蒐集,將基礎理論、不同背景時期變遷沿革,各該時期規範的探究,鋪陳本文研究檢察權主導下的兩岸犯罪偵查制度主題;另方面,爲求對兩岸制度認識的完整,並互為對照比較,以兩岸檢察權為主導下的「犯罪偵查」為中心與範圍,探討靜態法令建制、組織設計,以及動態權限行使、監督控制等,呈現於「檢察權」掌控偵查而提起公訴基礎,兩岸於刑事程序中犯罪偵查的異同,並尋求下階段立法,未來可能應有的設計研議,共同為彼此推動互助或合作奠下基石。
    本文自兩岸檢察權下的偵查制度探討歸納可知:檢察權的基礎理論或發展,均逐步尋求更堅實憲政結構角色、法律性質定位等,作為未來持續發揮功能與作用的基礎,立法的走向也被賦予更多樣化、多元的公共利益維護者的角色期待;此外,偵查階段於制度面的改善,更趨於符合現代法治國原理的要求,強化對偵查程序的監督力量,檢察權也備受倚賴,在刑事訴訟程序偵查階段價值突顯,以及檢察權必然介入存在下,益徵檢察權的定位明確與職權運作的重要性。故如何試圖扭轉犯罪追訴與處罰,自傳統的以「審判」為中心,轉移至以「偵查」為中心,透過確立偵查過程,係由具完整法學訓練,制度上賦予具國家法秩序維護角色的檢察官作為主導者,強化人權保障思維的偵查程序設計,均係植基於檢察權控有「犯罪偵查監督」的重要機制下,兩岸犯罪偵查程序應有的努力思考方向。
    The cooperation between China and Taiwan seldom interchange by public channel but usually by private channel because of justice sovereign. Moreover, both can’t penetrate with the systems of crime investigation mutually to cooperate with each other. Hence, we must hold the spirit of seeking common ground and putting aside the differences to understand the substances of the systems Cross Strait thoroughly in order to analyze the divergences. Furthermore, above all are the foundations to build a constant and stable cooperation Cross Strait, which is considered as an important task in the future.
    The final decisions of prosecution during the penal procedure are made by prosecutors in the system of crime investigation of China and Taiwan, which means the prosecutors dominate prosecution and are charged of supervision in law. As a result, the study is based on the analysis of literature, history and comparison to initially gather facts in order to connect basic theories, documents of changes of the regulation in each era, and documents of the research of regulations in each era to this passage concerning the subject of the administrative power of prosecutors under Cross Strait regulations. In addition, to look for the complete understanding and comparison with the systems Cross Strait, the study puts a focal point in crime investigation of systems dominated by prosecutors to seek legislation, organization framing and power to exercise, supervise and control, which presents the prosecution is the center of the investigation and the differences and similarities of the crime investigation systems Cross Strait. Moreover, the study seeks for the legislation and devises the possible design of future to lay foundation on the cooperation Cross Strait.
    The result from the analysis of the crime investigation of Cross Strait: The basic theories and history of prosecution which seek to become more substantial in the constitutional structure and a position in law, are the foundation to function well and constantly, while the legislature is given expectations to protect the various public interests; Moreover, the improvement of institution of investigation conforms to the demand of rule of law. Also, the enforcement supervising the investigation which relies on the prosecution reveals its own value during the penal procedure. The inevitable intervention of prosecutor shows the importance of clear position and operation of the prosecution. Consequently, by establishing the investigation firmly, the system entitles the prosecutor to become the protector of law and order in the state, to emphasize humanization in the design of the prosecuting procedure; all of the above are based on the critical mechanism "Supervised Crime Prosecution", which should be strongly considered throughout the practice of Criminal Investigation between China and Taiwan.
    顯示於類別:[中國大陸研究所] 學位論文

    文件中的檔案:

    檔案 大小格式瀏覽次數
    0KbUnknown201檢視/開啟

    在機構典藏中所有的資料項目都受到原著作權保護.

    TAIR相關文章

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library & TKU Library IR teams. Copyright ©   - 回饋