關 鍵 詞: |
檢察系統;搜索;監聽;筆錄;辯護權 |
中文摘要: |
關於檢察制度是否適當、檢察官權限是否過大等問題,長期以來備受各界爭論。自民國 86 年 12 月修正刑事訴訟法卸除檢察官羈押權限開始,檢察官先後又失去了搜索與監聽的權限,究其所以,不外為了避免檢察權之濫用,造成人權過度侵害。而自相關法制修正之結構來說,立法者似將檢察權行使當否之爭議,交由法院(司法機關)來監督,期待法院中立的角色,能夠發揮制衡檢察權的功能。本文擬探討現行刑事訴訟法制所規範之檢察監督結構,特別是對於檢察官所為提起公訴以外之偵查決定所提供之監督模式,並檢驗現行檢察監督之規範是否符合司法監督模式。
|
英文關鍵詞: |
prosecutorial system;search;wiretap;minute;the right to counsel |
英文摘要: |
Whether the ROC prosecution system is appropriate and the prosecutorial power is too broad has long been argued. To avoid abuses of prosecutorial power and infringement of human rights, public prosecutors lost powers to detain, to search and to wiretap since December 1997. Congress seems to rely on the judicial power to examine prosecutorial discretion as an institutional check. This study tries to discuss the examining institution of prosecutorial power, especially for non-indictment decisions, and examine if the current provisions in the ROC Criminal Procedure Code complies with the model of judicial review.
|
目 次: |
壹、前言 貳、以人權保障為目的之檢察監督 參、辯護監督 肆、筆錄監督 伍、結論
|
相關法條: |
|
相關判解: |
|
相關函釋: |
|
相關論著: |
|