On the Proof Standard of Arrest

In practice, in order to prevent the dissimilation of arrest measures caused by extreme understanding of arrest conditions, it is necessary to set clear, accurate and operable arrest proof standards. From the perspective of the whole criminal procedure proof system, the proof standard of arrest should be lower than that of prosecution and conviction, and higher than that of filing a case, so as to reflect the progressive and hierarchical nature of the proof standard of criminal procedure. In general, the standard of proof of arrest in China should reach the standard of “clear and credible”, that is, the evidence related to the relevant facts of the case and the situation of the arrested person should be clear and there is no contradiction between the evidences. The prosecutor who decides to arrest should believe that the arrested person has reached the legal arrest conditions. The application of the arrest measures requires a clear standard of proof. The three elements of arrest also require their respective standards of proof based on different characteristics. The inner conviction of the neutral judge in decision-making should be introduced into the standard of proof, so as to clearly express the proof standard of the three elements.     

错误扣船的形态、性质及相关问题

错误扣船有三大基本形态,即主体错误、客体错误和其他形态错误而产生的错误扣船。基于请求人原因、法院原因而错误扣船的法律性质从根本上讲是不同的,但两者的损害赔偿范围并无原则性的区别。鉴于错误扣船的重大危害,应采取四方面的措施予以防范和补救。     

完善我国逮捕制度的思考

基于对发现犯罪真实的片面追求,我国逮捕制度在逮捕条件、逮捕审查程序和逮捕救济制度等方面都存在明显缺陷。应当借鉴国外先进诉讼理念及制度设计,以无罪推定和程序正义原则为指导,通过一系列的改革完善我国逮捕制度。     

审查逮捕程序改革的进路——以提高逮捕案件质量为核心

我国审查逮捕程序存在的最突出的问题是错捕和不当逮捕比例过高,这主要是由于侦查机关没有对逮捕的全部条件承担证明责任和犯罪嫌疑人诉讼地位客体化造成的。调整批捕权的职权配置,将其交给法院行使,并不能达成以审查逮捕的正当程序控制逮捕的目标。我们应当以树立检察官在审查逮捕程序中的裁判者角色为核心,维系审查逮捕程序的诉讼构造,强化对逮捕全部条件的审查,改进检察机关审查逮捕的工作机制,创造犯罪嫌疑人及其律师在审查逮捕程序中发挥作用的条件,推行不捕理由双重说明机制,进而强化侦查机关对逮捕条件的证明责任,以实现审查逮捕程序的正当化,达到防止错捕、减少不当逮捕,并为公诉程序、审判程序纵深改革创造条件的目的。     

Police and the War on Women: A Gender-Linked Examination Behind and In Front of the Blue Curtain

The war on women was a term coined during the 2012 election cycle that referred to attempts to pass legislation that would limit women's rights, from control of women's bodies (with a particular focus on birth control, abortion, and the aftereffects of rape) to equal pay for women and their rights in the workforce (M. E. Gilman, 2014 Gilman, M. E. (2014). Feminism, democracy, and the “war on women.” Law & Inequality, 32, 1–30. [Google Scholar]). One arena in which evidence of such a war's impact on women may be assessed is behind and in front of the blue curtain of policing. To what extent, then, does policing reflect culture that supports and facilitates a war on women? We review arrest trends for female offenders, discuss police responses to crimes against women, and examine policies and practices that may improve understanding of the criminal justice system's role in this war. We find evidence of changes in police perspectives, actions, and policies toward women as perpetrators and victims of crime. Specifically, at the same time that police undertook more aggressive enforcement efforts against certain types of female offenders, resulting in trends for women that were often the reverse of those for men, there was an absence of similar attention to laws and policies protecting women as victims.     

新形势下非法集资犯罪之审查逮捕研究

近年来,非法集资犯罪有高发态势,呈现出新的特征。由于非法集资的复杂性和特殊性,检察机关在审查逮捕中,遇到了一系列理论与实务方面的问题。揭开非法集资新形势下的面纱,直面非法集资犯罪侦查的困境,解读非法集资司法解释的新规,正视非法集资审查逮捕的现状,以宽严相济刑事政策为指引,从构建要案审查机制、推进司法行政协作、强化羁押必要审查、拓宽侦查监督内涵入手,进一步完善非法集资犯罪的审查逮捕工作。     

走私案件主要犯罪嫌疑人难于缉获的原因及对策

在侦缉走私案件的实际工作中 ,常常碰到因主要犯罪嫌疑人难于缉拿归案而导致案件不能破获的情况。经调查分析 ,造成主要犯罪嫌疑人难于缉获的原因有如下五个方面 :案件移交制度不完善 ;侦缉部门战斗力不强 ;对走私案件的处理不恰当 ;走私犯罪分子反侦查伎俩提高 ;群众法律意识不强。要改变这种状况 ,各级领导高度重视是前提 ;提高侦查人员素质是基础 ;加大侦查追缉力度是关键 ;建立健全规章制度是保证 ;充分宣传发动群众是法宝。     

“捕诉合一”视域下侦查监督的路径偏差与改革回归

检察机关监督侦查活动是防范侦查权滥用、推进公正司法的重要制度安排,捕诉一体化办案模式的推行影响着检察机关法律监督职能的发挥,加强了检察院对于侦查活动的监督效力。但是,新办案模式下侦查监督或多或少存在一些运行偏差。为了解决这些问题,我们需要在捕诉合一视域下,通过平衡检察机关办案节奏、推广智能化监督方式、落实司法责任制以及探索建立侦查监督案件化办理模式等措施,实现新形势下侦查监督的改革回归。     

检察引导侦查的双重检视与改革进路

检察引导侦查作为检察制度近年来的重要改革趋势,已经取得了较好的实践效果。目前司法实务中存在着两种基本的检察引导侦查实践模式:内部参与型引导模式与外部监督型引导模式。在具体运行过程中,引导侦查在启动程序和界限方面的任意性、检警衔接的脱节、监督效力的两极分化和同向损益的结构失衡风险,都在制约着这项机制的效能发挥。在理论层面,检警一体化无法为检察引导侦查提供合理证成;引导权应当成为检警关系的新型权力分支。对此,从规范运作与配套机制出发,从规范引导范围与界限、强化监督效能、补充侦查说理化改造、对引导权力规范运行的程序性控制以及推进智慧检务建设等方面入手,以期有益于推进这项机制的改革实践。     

从立法上完善我国的未决羁押制度

我国的未决羁押制度存在着羁押适用率高、超期羁押现象普遍、逮捕未与羁押实行分离、看守所未能充分保障被羁押人合法权利等诸多问题。究其原因,主要是我国现行刑事诉讼法对该制度的规定欠缺科学性与合理性。因此,立法机关有必要采取有效措施,严格未决羁押期限,实行捕押分离制度,进行看守所体制改革,使未决羁押制度既能保障司法办案,又能保障被羁押人的权益。