侦查到案制度:从现实到理想——一个实证角度的研究

The Investigation To-case System:from Reality to Ideal——A Research on Empirical ViewpointMeasures to Bring an Offender to Justice:From Reality to Ideal--Studying From the Angle of Positivism

传唤、拘传、口头传唤、留置、抓捕构成了实践中的侦查到案措施体系。对三个典型地区公安机关的调研表明,法定到案措施与非法定到案措施的适用明显错位。根据研究资料分析:审批程序耗时与到案期限紧张这两个因素造成了法定到案措施适用率低下;相比而言,非法定到案措施具有适用条件灵活、适用机制简便、适用手段具有不同程度的强制性以及适用期限弹性较大等特点,由于这些特点,侦查人员较愿选择非法定到案措施。实践中到案措施体系的犯罪控制功能显而易见,从程序正当角度评价,这一体系的运行既有权力控制的倾向,也有权力滥用、不当限制权利的倾向。侦查到案制度的改革应坚持犯罪控制与人权保障相平衡的理念,汲取实践中的理性做法,适当参考国外同类制度,建立一个逻辑严密、协调一致,能够充分应对各类案件特点和证据条件的到案措施体系。

To call, summon for detention, orally call, detain and seize are all investigative measures to bring an offender to justice （MBOJ）. The experience of three sample police stations shows that there is a sharp contrast between legitimate MBOJ and illegitimate MBOJ. This study indicates that the reason why legitimate MBOJ are seldom taken lies in two factors ： time consuming of examination and approval of writs and the urgency of the task. Compara- tively, detectives are willing to take illegitimate MBOJ simply because they are flexible, simple, compulsory and free of time limitations. The practical function of crime control of MBOJ is obvious. From the angle of due process, one can find an inclination of power restraint and abuse and undue restriction of rights in MBOJ. While improving MBOJ, one must hold the balance between crime control and human rights protection, draw experience from practice, refer to foreign precedents, and build a MBOJ regime that is theoretically supported and well coordinated so that it can adapt itself to all cases and evidences.