死刑的正当程序研究.pdf

湘潭大学 硕士学位论文 死刑的正当程序研究 姓名：刘文化 申请学位级别：硕士 专业：诉讼法学 指导教师：刘梅湘 20070501 I 摘 要 摘 要 死刑正当程序是指奠基于正当程序理念和标准之上、但又高于非死刑案件对 于正当程序之要求或标准的一整套适用于死刑案件的正当程序死刑正当程序的 主要目的在于有效保障面临死刑者基本人权特别是生命权不被轻易侵害，实现程 序上的慎杀、少杀，并防止错杀死刑的正当程序整个过程除了具有普通程序所 具有的诉讼性、公开性、及时性、参与性的特点之外，还具有普通程序所无法比 拟的特性，具体表现在面临死刑者享有更多的诉讼权利、特殊的裁决程序、特殊 的证明标准和特殊的救济程序四个方面 有比较才有鉴别从近年来国际公约、刑事司法准则以及主要法治国家刑事 司法实践来看，死刑程序正当性主要表现在死刑案件犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的辩护 权得到充分保障、对死刑案件采取较高的证明标准、采取特殊的裁决程序、死刑 案件被告人享有充分的救济程序和途径等等所有的这些，都使死刑程序严格区 别于普通刑事程序，都为死刑案件被告人得到全方位而又最公正的程序保障创造 了条件而反思我国，1996 年的刑事诉讼法和 1998 年通过的一系列司法解释，对 于死刑程序的规定尚不完善。

2005 到 2007 年以来，最高法、最高检、司法部、公 安部针对死刑案件存在的种种尖锐问题作出了一系列新的规定，突出表现在死刑 核准权的回收和死刑案件二审一律开庭但是，当前我国整个死刑程序仍存在诸 多问题，突出表现在一是面临死刑者不享有不强迫自证其罪的权利，侦查程序律 师辩护难以介入、导致死刑案件刑讯逼供严重、为冤假错案的发生埋下祸根；二 是死刑复核程序诉讼化改造阻力重重，各方意见难以统一除此之外，死刑案件 证明标准过低，死刑案件上诉程序不具有自动性等也成为死刑程序正当化的障碍 从实现死刑程序正当化的整体目标出发，我们需要赋予面临死刑者更多的诉 讼权利，革除审判程序、死刑复核程序直至死刑执行程序的种种弊端，在此基础 上有的放矢、最终实现死刑程序整体正当化之目标 关键词：死刑；正当程序；诉讼化；救济 II Abstract The due process of death penalty which lays its foundation on the idea and criterion of due process, is a whole set of due process applied to death penalty cases. Its demand and criterion are higher than that of other cases. The due process of death penalty mainly aims to protect the basic human rights especially the right of life from being aggrieved effectively,which belongs to people who will be sentenced to death, and make the killing cautiously, killing less come true and avoid the killing innocent by error. Besides the same feature of litigation, openness, timeliness and participation as other common proceedings have, the due process of death penalty has four other traits that can not be rivaled by other proceedings as follows: the people who will be sentenced to death have more rights in proceeding, the special ruling process, the special standard of proof and special remedy process. We can draw a conclusion by comparison. From recent Compendium of United Documents, Criminal Judicial Principle and experience in every law country, the trait of due in process of death penalty is mainly indicated by those as follows: the rights to defense which belong to the criminal suspects and defendants in death cases have been protected fully, the death penalty cases have been heard in higher standard of proof and special ruling process, the criminal defendants have had plenty of approaches to remedy their rights and so on. All of above distinguish the process of death penalty from common criminal process and make condition to protect defendant in death penalty cases by all sided and the most equitable proceeding. Considered the situation in our country, the Criminal Procedure Law revised in 1996 and the series of Judicial Interpretation adopted in 1998,both of them didn’t give us a perfect regulation about the process of death penalty. From 2005 to 2007, the concerned organs including the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Department of Justice and the Public Security have made a series of regulations about some serious problems in death penalty case, especially about reclaiming the right of examining and approving death penalty and all second instance of death penalty cases should hold a court. However, in our country there are still a lot of problems about the whole process of death penalty. First, the people who will be sentenced to death doesn’t have the privilege against compulsory self-incrimination and it’s very hard to let attorney participate in, so that there are still serious actions of confession by torture, and all of this may result in unjust cases. Secondly, there are some blocks in the trial process of regenerating Procedure for Review of Death Sentence for that to be consistent in this III problem is very hard. Besides, there are other blocks in having process of death penalty due, such as standard of proof in death penalty is lower, process of appealing can not be self-moving and so on. To due the process of death penalty, we should endue more rights to the one who will be sentenced to death, get rid of the disadvantages in Procedure of Trial, Review of Death Sentences and Execution, so that we will have a definite object in view to realize the due process of death penalty finally. Key words: Death penalty; Due process; Litigation; Remedy 1 引引 言言 近年来，一系列冤假错案的曝光屡次拨动笔者正义的心灵和朴素的良知。

杜 培武、陈国清、孙万刚、李化伟、佘祥林等重大冤假错案的主人公，用自己的亲 身经历与不屈抗争，为中国的刑事司法改革留下了极为沉重而又富有历史意义的 一笔一条条健康的生命被无情的加以折磨与摧残，让笔者一次又一次的感觉到 程序正义——特别是死刑案件中的正当程序——被放肆的践踏，被告人的正当权 利被肆意的亵渎和侵害的残酷事实这些值得深思的案件多次让我激愤和追问的 疑惑在于：死刑正当程序的价值何在？死刑正当程序的威信何在？为什么在历经 侦查、起诉、一审、二审、再审、死刑复核等诸多程序的滤网之后，有关死刑的 冤假错案还是频频发生？为什么在诸多死刑误判案件发生的背后，我们仍然不能 为许多无辜者提供一套安全的防护装置？我们不得不反思的现实是：我们的死刑 程序是安全的吗？我们的死刑程序是正当的吗？ 我们应该构建一种怎样的死刑 正当程序？ 秉承一种对生命权利的热爱和终极关怀，笔者觉得很有必要将刑罚当中的极 刑——死刑——置身于正当程序的视野，通过对死刑与正当程序的关联，来搭建 死刑刑罚的理性化、科学化、人性化平台，在正当程序的轨道上，让死刑这种最 残酷的刑罚方式也能够彰显温柔与人性的一面如果说我们不能消灭死刑，但是 我们至少有权利要求：在终结某个生命之前，应当给予其一个公正、理性的司法 程序——亦即死刑的正当程序。

2 第一章第一章 死刑正当程序的内涵与功能死刑正当程序的内涵与功能 1.1 死刑正当程序的含义 1.1 死刑正当程序的含义 要讨论死刑正当程序的含义，离不开对法律正当程序的理解毕竟，死刑正 当程序只是法律正当程序的一种具体形态按照英国历史上著名的大法官、法学 家科克（Edward。