审查逮捕司法化改革的模式定位

域外羁押审查可以概分为职权主义和当事人主义两种模式。职权主义模式将是否羁押视为法院依职权调查的事项，当事人主义模式则是法院被动听审。我国审查逮捕立法与听证化改革均未赋予检察机关依职权主动调查证据的权限，导致无论是历次修法还是当前的听证化改革，都因缺乏对模式的准确定位而陷入纯技术性的调整。我国的审查逮捕司法化改革，应当首先探讨模式定位问题，在回归职权主义本来内涵的前提下，赋予检察机关广泛的调查权，并最终建立程序密度高低有致的差序审查格局，而不应当将改革重点放在对有限案件如何进行对审审理之上。

A Concrete Exposition of the Model of Judicialization Reform of Detention Hearing

Extraterrestrial detention hearing can be roughly divided into inquisitorial system and adversary system. In the former system， it is the court's authority to decide on the detention hearing of the accused， while in the latter the court just carry out the detention hearing as required. Neither the legislative amendments nor the reform of hearing in China endows the procuratorial organs with the authority to investigate evidence beyond the scope of evidence submitted by both investigators and defenders. As a result， both the previous amendments and the hearing reform often fall into pure technical adjustment due to the lack of accurate positioning of the detention hearing model. In this regard， China's first task in its detention hearing reform is model repositioning， so as to establish a differential hearing system instead of focusing on verbal debates on limited cases on the basis of granting prosecutors with extensive inquiry powers.