论文部分内容阅读
国内有种观点，认为“嫌疑有据”的无罪拘留是合法拘留，不负国家赔偿责任。本文对德国、日本、俄罗斯的类似我国刑事拘留的紧急强制措施负国家赔偿责任违法性进行比较研究。它们的共同规则为，对犯罪嫌疑人采用紧急强制措施后，经侦查审判查明其无罪的，国家负赔偿责任，而不管被采用紧急强制的犯罪嫌疑人在采用该紧急强制措施之前是否有犯罪，采用紧急强制措施的程序是否违法。德国还具独特规则，对犯罪嫌疑人来用紧急强制措施后，经查明罪不该采用紧急强制措施的，国家也负赔偿责任。
There is a domestic view that innocent detention of “suspected suspects” is a legal detention and does not shoulder the responsibility of national compensation. This article makes a comparative study on the illegal state liability for indemnification of emergency coercive measures similar to the criminal detention of Germany, Japan and Russia. Their common rule is that after the adoption of emergency coercive measures against criminal suspects, the state shall be liable on investigation and found guilty of innocence, irrespective of whether or not an emergency coercive criminal suspect has been employed before the adoption of the emergency coercive measure Crimes, whether the procedure for adopting urgent coercive measures is illegal. Germany also has its own unique rules. After the criminal suspects come to use the emergency coercive measures, the state should also be liable for compensation if the criminal compulsory measures should not be adopted.