正当程序、经济推理与“警察圈套”

Due Procedure , Economic Reasoningand “ Police Entrapment ”

在"警察圈套"的司法审查标准问题上,美国联邦法院判例及学术界有"主观审查标准"与"客观审查标准"之争。从保护被引诱人人权角度看,两种审查标准均有可能造成人权保护中的法律漏洞,运用经济分析方法审查可以对之进行相应的弥补。根据科斯的经济理论,通过立法确定被引诱人的基本人权,降低交易成本,以使"第二方监督"产生实效,能够更有效地防范侦查机关滥用诱惑侦查权,也更实际可行。对被引诱人的初始权利的立法界定以及降低其维权成本,可以看作是吓阻警方违法侦查以解决警察圈套问题的关键。如果被引诱人系事前无犯罪倾向者,根据正当程序原则,国家机关可能因此丧失公诉权。即使被引诱人具有事前犯罪倾向,也应当允许法院对警方恶劣的引诱行为进行司法审查,在量刑幅度上保护被引诱人。非法证据排除规则难以吓阻警察的诱捕侦查行为,通过减轻被引诱人的证明责任以及限制犯罪前科证据的使用,能够更有效地保护被引诱人的正当权益。

When we focus on the problem of what is the rightful judicial standard when defendants raise motion of police entrapment, we may find different approaches which made by U. S. Federal Court sustained or opposed by scholars such as subjective approach and objective approach. In fact, subjective or objective approach couldn＇ t solve the problem of protecting the suspect stung by police, but economical analysis may be advantageous to make up the legal hole existing in the problem of police entrapment. It may be practical and feasible to establish the right methods if we consider the defendants＇ all kinds of cost after reanalyzing the famous ＂Coase Theorem＂, especially in the problem of protecting his fundamental Constitutional rights. Initial rights and remedy rights by constitution may be the effective methods to deter police outrageous sting misconduct. The criminal defendant shall be relinquished by public prosecution if police induced and stung innocent people committing a crime. Relieving the proof of burden of persuasion may be the best choice to protect suspects＇ benefit and reduce his cost in spite of making exclusionary rule on problem of police entrapment.