监视居住监督管理措施的法解释学分析——以《刑事诉讼法》第76条为中心

An Analysis on Regulatory Measures for Residential Surveillance: Focusing on Provision 76 in Criminal Procedure Law

2012年《刑事诉讼法》新增第76条,对监视居住的监督管理措施方式所作出的规定缺乏操作性。本文拟通过法解释学方法,以第76条为中心,对监视居住监督管理措施进行分析,得出如下结论 :(1)监督管理措施的电子监控与通信监控不属于技术侦查措施;(2)监督管理措施的适用目的是保障诉讼的顺利进行,而非变相侦查;(3)监督管理措施的决定主体为公安机关,适用对象仅为被监视居住人;(4)监督管理措施的启动方式为执行机关主动启动,且不需要经过严格的批准手续;(5)通信监控仅适用于侦查阶段;(6)干预隐私权以达到监督管理措施的适用目的为限;(7)需通过审查,对采取监视居住监督管理措施所获的事实材料进行证据意义的定性。

The newly added provision 76 in “Criminal Procedure Law” in 2012 is short of operability on the regulatory measures of residential surveillance. This paper intends to analyze regulatory measures of residential surveillance based on provision 76 and conclude as the following: (1) electronic and communications monitoring of regulatory measures are not technical investigation measures; (2) the purpose of regulatory measures is to ensure smooth legal proceedings, rather than disguise the investigation; (3) it is the police department who make decisions on regulatory measures, and it is only applicable to the people under surveillance;(4) executive bodies should start regulatory measures and no strict approval procedures needed; (5) communication monitoring is only applicable to the stage of investigation; (6) privacy intervention is limited to achieve the purpose of regulatory measures ; (7) the material facts obtained from regulatory measures need to be reviewed when deciding as acceptable evidence.