论文部分内容阅读
自有刑事诉讼之始,国家公权力便参与其中。无论是那种模式,国家公权力都作为一个重要的刑事诉讼参与者,活跃在刑事诉讼之中,只是在不同的模式中,其重要程度有所区别而已。限制国家公权力还是尽量发挥国家公权力在刑事诉讼中的作用,始终都是各大模式研究的重点。注重保障人权还是注重惩罚犯罪等不同的诉讼目的使各刑事诉讼模式中的国家公权力的配置区别明显,其中的合理程度也是各有分说。我国现在提倡构建和谐社会,其刑事诉讼的目的必然是追求和谐的社会价值,基于此我国刑事诉讼模式中的国家公权力改如何配置?就对我国刑事诉讼模式中国家公权力的配置做一个浅陋的分析。
Since the beginning of criminal proceedings, state public power will participate. Either way, the public power of the state, as an important participant in criminal proceedings, is active in criminal proceedings, and only in different modes, the degree of importance is different. Limiting the state public power or maximizing the role of state public power in criminal proceedings has always been the focus of the major models. Pay attention to the protection of human rights or focus on punishing crime and other different purposes of the litigation so that the state litigation model of public power distribution differences are obvious, the reasonableness of which is also divided. Now our country advocates the construction of a harmonious society. The purpose of criminal procedure must be the pursuit of harmonious social values. Based on this, how to configure the state public power in the criminal procedure model in our country? Analysis.