欧洲人权法院之诱惑侦查审查标准及启示

Examination Standard of Temptation Investigation at European Court of Human Rights and Its Enlightenment

对于诱惑侦查的法律规制是个世界性难题,不少国家建立了较健全的规制方法,且不断地探索完善,以求控制犯罪与保护人权的动态平衡。我国立法已明确授权使用诱惑侦查,但由于法律规定的宽泛与模糊、司法处断原则的失当,诱惑侦查措施的使用凸显出执法无序与司法失范的弊端。"Grba v.Croatia案"的裁决反映出欧洲人权法院在审查诱惑侦查合法性过程中的最新立场,即通过实质性检验和程序性检验这一双重检验标准,要求侦查法官在授权时必须对必要性进行详细说理而不能采取程式化的语言方式,同时,国内法院应在程序上对被追诉方的抗辩理由认真审查,充分保障其质证权,防止侵犯其公正审判权。欧洲人权法院的态度很好地体现了诱惑侦查过程中打击犯罪和保障人权两大价值的平衡,于我国具有重要的借鉴意义。

the legal regulation of temptation investigation is a worldwide problem. Many countries have established a relatively sound regulation method, and continuously explored and improved it in order to keep the dynamic balance of controlling crime and protecting human rights. China’s legislation has clearly authorized the use of temptation investigation, but due to the wide and vague legal provisions and the improper principle of judicial adjudication, the use of temptation investigation measures highlights the disadvantages of law enforcement disorder and judicial anomie. The case decision of "Grba v. Croatia" reflects the latest position of the European court of human rights in the process of legality review of temptation investigation. That is programmed by the double standards of substantive inspection and procedural inspection, which demands investigative judge to explain in detail the necessity when authorized, but he cannot use the stylized language. At the same time, the domestic courts should review seriously the defense of the prosecuted in the procedure, fully protect the right of cross-examination, and prevent infringement of his right to a fair trial.The attitude of the European court of human rights embodies the balance between the two values of combating crime and safeguarding human rights in the process of temptation investigation, which is of great significance to China.