審查逮捕聽證程式研究

我國逮捕實踐中存在的批捕率高、羈押量大等問題，很大程度上為現行審查逮捕模式所致。審查逮捕作為一種司法性質的職能，不但應由司法機關行使，更應以司法化的方式行使。在我國刑事司法語境下，檢察機關負責審查批捕存在理論與制度上的正當性。基於此，改革的關鍵在於將檢察機關所進行的封閉式、行政化的逮捕審查引導至訴訟化軌道，以切實保障犯罪嫌疑人的基本權利，為辯護權的行使架設平臺。目前，我國部分地區正在推進的審查逮捕聽證程式探索，取得了一定成效；域外保釋聽證的司法實踐，亦為逮捕司法化改革的進一步完善提供了有益經驗。推進審查逮捕聽證程式建設，應當在總結試點成效、借鑒域外經驗的基礎上，革新辦案理念，確立檢察官居中聽審、偵辯兩造對抗的訴訟結構，由檢察官遵循客觀中立的要求進行審查，並賦予被追訴人相應的救濟權利，以此構建我國審查逮捕的正當程式。

There is a high rate and a large amount of detention in China’s legal practice, which is largely due to the current pattern of detention examination. As a judicial function, detention examination should be exercised not only by judicial authorities but also in a judicial manner. Under China’s criminal justice system, it is legitimate in theory and in practice for procuratorates to be responsible for the examination. On this basis, the key to reform is to guide the enclosed and administrative examination conducted by the procuratorates towards the litigation path, so as to safeguard the fundamental rights of criminal suspects and set up a platform for the exercise of the right to defense. Now hearing procedures for detention examination are being promoted in some regions in China, which has made some achievements. Meanwhile, the judicial practice of extraterritorial bail hearings has also provided some useful experience for the further improvement of judicial reform in detention system. To promote hearing procedures for detention examination, on the basis of summarizing the achievements of pilots and using the experience from extraterritorial regions, we should reform the perception of handling cases, and establish a litigation structure in which public procurators are in the middle for hearings and investigators and counsels defend against each other, which means that public procurators should examine in an objective and neutral manner and that the prosecuted persons shall be granted their corresponding remedy rights, so as to build and improve the legitimate procedures for detention examination system in China.