| 英文摘要 |
The study of criminal procedure law in China has a relatively deep basis of comparative law research. With the in-depth promotion of reform and opening up, the comparative criminal procedure research restarted along with China's convergence with the world, and has gradually entered into a period of development. The comparative law research paradigm has been frequently utilized and rich research results gradually accumulated. Overall, since the reform and opening up, the comparative research on criminal procedure has gone through three stages of foundation, development and deepening, showing the characteristics of increasingly diversified research paths, deepening research contents and pragmatism-oriented research objectives. Among them, the transplantation, learning or absorption of foreign criminal procedure legislation, including concepts, systems and techniques, is a main line running through it. This undoubtedly provides textual and theoretical support for us to master the foreign legal system and learn from their experience, and also has a certain positive influence on the development of Chinese criminal procedure legislation and knowledge system. However, from the perspective of research, the existing research generally has the problems of fixed idea and single perspective, and pays too much attention to the institutional text and lacks a comprehensive view of foreign criminal justice practice. From the perspective of the research's object, the "Western-centeredness" feature of China's existing research on comparative criminal procedure is prominent. From the perspective of the research's content, the existing research results are generally fragmented and rough, and many studies are on the surface of the system and practice, which are not systematic and profound enough. In the future, in addition to a deep understanding of the concepts and rules of foreign criminal justice, we should also start from the perspective of judicial practice, conduct empirical research on foreign criminal justice and pay timely attention to the latest developments of foreign empirical research; at the same time, we should follow up on the use of the latest research methods and contents of criminal justice by foreign scholars, such as the use of specialized and sophisticated statistical and even artificial intelligence methods to study criminal justice. In terms of comparative objects, the traditional comparative idea of using the legal system as a criterion for differentiation can be properly abandoned, especially to avoid blindly taking the highly developed countries with the rule of law in the common law system and the civil law system as the reference, but to use a more scientific type of division to make more open and diversified comparisons. In addition, the idea of functional comparison should also be established, which is to compare systems that actually perform the same or similar functions in judicial practice rather than being confined to a particular legal system or a particular country. Finally, the research perspective and position should be changed. From a position of "what we lack" to "what we have", we can create a Chinese school of comparative criminal procedure based on China's practical needs and disseminate the international voice of Chinese scholars of criminal procedure. On the basis of respecting and understanding the existing international rules, we strive to exert the influence of big countries on international criminal rules, promote the construction of a new international order of rule of law, and endeavor to integrate the rules and concepts of the domestic rule of law into the international rule of law construction process, so as to assist the establishment of international criminal procedure rules and the recognition of Chinese system. |
本站僅提供期刊文獻檢索。
