刑事职能管辖错位的程序规制

Procedural Regulations on the Misplacement ofCriminal Functional Jurisdiction

对于侦查机关之间的职能管辖错位,现行法律在查办阶段采取"直接移送规则",审查起诉阶段采取"实体判断+及时移送模式",审判阶段采取"单一审查地域管辖模式",并未形成完备的程序规制规则。监察体制改革后,职能管辖错位可能对被调查人的辩护权产生较大影响,损害监察体制改革目标。2019年《人民检察院刑事诉讼规则》第357条采取"二元论",对涉监察委员会管辖的案件创设了"实体+听取意见双重审查模式",以监察机关的意志决定程序走向,不利于司法制约以及保障被调查人权利。实际上,职能管辖错位是否需要程序制裁应当权衡诉讼效率、实体错误与否、违法程度、权利损害程度四个方面。如果监察委员会查办了侦查机关管辖的案件,对于恶意违法的应当否定该职能管辖错位行为的法律效力,而不是以办案机关的意见作为后续程序处理的标准。我国应当完善制裁职能管辖错位的程序,对于恶意的职能管辖错位应当退回办案机关,否定阶段性终结决定的效力,之前取得的实物证据作为瑕疵证据处理,否定言词证据的证据能力。

As for the misplacement of the investigation subject’s functional jurisdiction, the existing law adopts the‘ direct transfer rule’ in the investigation stage, and the‘ substantive judgment + timely transfer mode’ in the examination and prosecution stage. At the trial stage, the ‘single review regional jurisdiction model’ was adopted, and no complete procedural regulations were formed. After the reform of the supervisory system, the misplacement of functional jurisdiction may greatly affect the defense rights of the persons under investigation and impair the objectives of the supervisory system reform. Article 357 of the Criminal Procedure Rules for People’s Procuratorates of 2019 adopts‘ dualism’, which created‘ substantial + hearing of opinions dual review model’ in the cases involving the supervisory committee, which determines the procedural direction by the will of the supervisory organ, which is not conducive to judicial restriction and the protection of the person’s rights under investigation. In fact, whether the dislocation of functional jurisdiction requires procedural sanctions should weigh the efficiency of litigation, entity error or not, the degree of violation of the law and the degree of damage to rights. The supervisory committee has investigated the cases under investigation jurisdiction, and should deny the effectiveness of litigation for the malicious violation, rather than take the opinions of the handling organs as the standard of follow-up procedure. China should perfect the procedure of sanction jurisdiction dislocation. For malicious jurisdiction dislocation, it should be returned to the case-handling organs. We should deny the effect of periodic termination decisions, treat the physical evidence obtained before as defective evidence, and deny the evidentiary ability of verbal evidence.