论文部分内容阅读
长久以来,秘密侦查所获材料的证据效力因立法空白而处于“似是而非”的尴尬境地。不仅使侦查机关有手脚被束缚感,加大了工作量,浪费了司法资源,同时也令人们开始质疑国家公权力的廉洁性和权威性,造成心理恐慌,不利于社会稳定。2012年3月14日的刑事诉讼法修正案再次让这个问题成为人们热议的话题,而不负众望的是,秘密侦查所获材料终于具备了证据的合法身份,掀开了神秘的面纱。但新刑事诉讼法关于秘密侦查证据的规定仅仅只有一条,且有侵害公民质证权之嫌。对此,我将在本文中予以详细说明,并在此基础上通过对域外立法的比较与分析给出完善建议。
For a long time, the evidence validity of the materials obtained by the secret investigation has been embarrassed by the “paradox” because of the legislative blank. This not only made the investigation organs have the sense of restraint, but also increased the workload and wasting judicial resources. At the same time, people began to question the integrity and authority of state public power, resulting in psychological panic and detrimental to social stability. The amendment to the Code of Criminal Procedure of March 14, 2012 once again made this issue a hot topic for the people. Expectingly, the contents of the secret investigation finally possessed the legal status of evidence and opened the mysterious veil. However, the new Code of Criminal Procedure provides only one piece of evidence on the investigation of clandestine evidence and there is a suspicion of infringement of the right of citizens to file their own evidence. In this regard, I will be detailed in this article, and on this basis through the comparison and analysis of extraterritorial legislation gives recommendations.