论羁押必要性审查的主体——评《人民检察院刑事诉讼规则(试行)》第六百一十七条

On the Censorship Subject of Detention Necessity——Comments on the article 617 of the People's Procuratorate Criminal Action Rules( Trial)

新《刑事诉讼法》第九十三条确立了羁押必要性审查制度,制定该制度的直接目的是强化检察机关对逮捕的监督和制约,在羁押必要性审查程序中实现诉讼职能与诉讼监督职能的分离。而《人民检察院刑事诉讼规则(试行)》第六百一十七条规定羁押必要性的审查工作主要由各个承担诉讼职能的办案部门负责,这种审查权的配置模式使诉讼职能与诉讼监督职能混同运行,无法保证审查主体的中立性。该解释与《刑事诉讼法》第九十三条存在矛盾。从《刑事诉讼法》第九十三条的立法意图来看,由相对中立的部门作为羁押必要性审查的主体是较为理性的选择。检察机关可以考虑设立诉讼监督部门,羁押必要性审查主要由诉讼监督部门负责,以提升审查的实效性和正当性。

The article 93 of the new ＂criminal action law＂ establishes the necessity custody censorship, the purpose of establishing the system is to strengthen the supervision and restrictions of the procuratorial organs and to realize the separation of litigation function and litigation supervision function. However, the article 617 of People＇s Procuratorate Criminal Procedure Rules （trial）expresses that the departments charging the litigation function should mainly borne the job of censorship of detention necessity, this mode of censorship has mixed the litigation function and litigation supervision function together which destroys the neutrality of the censorship subject. This judicial explanation is contrary to the article 93 of Criminal Procedural Law. Seeing from the legislative intent of the article 93,it is much more reasonable to choose a neutral department as the censorship subject of detention necessity. Procuratorial organs should consider setting up the litigation supervision department which charge the censorship of detention necessity to improve the effectiveness and validity of it.