CAJ | 학술논문

取保候审的适用条件与保证方式存在本质不同,但在实践中,保证方式的规定已在相当程度上异化成为一种条件设定。因受到保证方式性质异化影响的群体集中体现为涉罪外来人员,所以该问题无法逃避平等理论的相关质疑。立法中以监视居住为替代措施的做法欠缺合理性,实务中建立管护基地的尝试是解决该问题的有益探索。但是,管护工作所依托的实体需要慎重选择,为使以接受管护为保证方式的被取保者的生活状态尽可能趋近一般的被取保者,社区组织是开展取保候审管护工作的更好依托选择。
취보후심적괄용조건여보증방식존재본질불동,단재실천중,보증방식적규정이재상당정도상이화성위일충조건설정。인수도보증방식성질이화영향적군체집중체현위섭죄외래인원,소이해문제무법도피평등이론적상관질의。입법중이감시거주위체대조시적주법흠결합이성,실무중건립관호기지적상시시해결해문제적유익탐색。단시,관호공작소의탁적실체수요신중선택,위사이접수관호위보증방식적피취보자적생활상태진가능추근일반적피취보자,사구조직시개전취보후심관호공작적경호의탁선택。
Natural differences exist between the conditions and the approaches to obtaining a guarantor pending trial. However, in the practice, the provisions of approaches have been changed into a potential design of condition, which has a seriously negative impact on those suspects. This issue is confronted with the challenge from the equality theory. Our law tries to handle it by using the home surveillance as a substitute, which lacks legitimacy. It is a helpful attempt to establish supervising bases as trying to resolve the problem. The entity to take supervising task should be chosen carefully. Community organizations may be a better choice to take charge since the living status of the supervised shouldn＇ t be much different from other suspects guaranteed liberty pending trial.