中国刑事诉讼认罪认罚从宽程序制度的完善
The Reconstruction of the System of the Leniency Based on Peccavi in Chinese Criminal Procedure
王静(중국청도대학법학원); 반협(중국해양대학교)
26권 4호, 25~40쪽
초록
认罪认罚从宽制度可以有效提高诉讼效率,认罪认罚从宽制度需要与我国刑事诉讼结构契合,方能实现司法公正并力争在更深层次上改变刑事诉讼模式。现有的认罪认罚从宽程序在中国刑事司法实践中陷入诸多困境,也影响到认罪认罚从宽制度的实施。重新审视和建构认罪认罚从宽制度,综合考虑影响认罪认罚制度运行的诸多因素并重新审视认罪认罚从宽审前程序的运行机制实属必要。完善中国审前程序分流机制的主要思路就是扩充审前程序分流功能,将尽可能多的刑事案件通过审前程序分流出去,如将酌定不起诉改造为轻罪不起诉,轻罪不起诉和刑事速裁程序在适用案件上将存在“竞争”关系,被告可以在轻罪不起诉和刑事速裁程序之间选择适用;将附条件不起诉扩充至普通刑事案件,检察院在可适用轻罪不起诉的案件中可作出附条件不起诉,同时检察院对“可能判处一年有期徒刑以下刑罚的案件”可作出附条件不起诉。当案件满足“不存在追诉的公共利益”和“可能判处一年有期徒刑以下刑罚的案件”时,如果犯罪嫌疑人认罪认罚,检察院可以作出附条件不起诉的决定;进一步扩充撤回起诉机制,对于属于轻罪不起诉和附条件不起诉适用范围的案件,如果被告人在审判阶段认罪认罚,检察院认为可以适用轻罪不起诉或附条件不起诉的,可以向法院申请撤回起诉,法院应当审查撤回起诉的理由,作出是否准许的裁定。此外,根据事实发现规则的不同,可以建构起普通程序、简易程序和刑事速裁程序的“实质性差别”。具体来说,完善普通程序中的认罪认罚从宽制度;适当借鉴有罪答辩制度,改革简易程序中的证明模式;以认罪认罚为基础,将刑事速裁程序改造为处罚令程序。
Abstract
The system of leniency based on peccavi can effectively improve litigation efficiency. The system of leniency based on peccavi needs to be consistent with the criminal procedure structure of our country, in order to achieve judicial justice and strive to change the criminal procedure mode at a deeper level. The existing system of leniency based on peccavi has been plagued by many difficulties in the practice of criminal justice in China, and it has also affected the implementation of the system of leniency based on peccavi. It is necessary to re-examine and construct the system of leniency based on peccavi, comprehensively consider the factors affecting the operation of the system of leniency based on peccavi and re-examine the operating mechanism of the system of leniency based on peccavi in pretrial criminal procedure. The main method of perfecting the system of leniency based on peccavi in pretrial procedure is enlarging the scope of application of diversion procedure so to reduce the caseload of courts largely. For example, we can transform the discretionary non-suing system to misdemeanor non-prosecution system. The misdemeanor non-prosecution system and criminal speedy trial procedure will have a “competitive” relationship in the applicable case, and the defendant can choose between misdemeanor non-prosecution and criminal speedy trial procedures. Besides, we can extend the conditional non-prosecution to ordinary criminal cases, and the procuratorate can make conditional non-prosecution in cases where misdemeanour can be applied, and the procuratorate can make conditional non-prosecution in “cases that may be sentenced to one year imprisonment”. When the case satisfies “the public interest in the absence of prosecution” and “a case in which the sentence may be sentenced to one year’s imprisonment,” the procuratorate may make a decision on conditional non-prosecution if the suspect pleads guilty; We can also further expand withdrawal of the prosecution mechanism. For cases that are subject to misdemeanor non-prosecution and conditional non-prosecution, if the defendant pleads guilty at the trial stage, the procuratorate can apply to the court for withdrawal of the prosecution in condition that the procuratorate considers that it is possible to apply misdemeanor non-prosecution or conditional non-prosecution. Then the court shall examine the reasons for withdrawing the indictment and make the decision as to whether or not to grant permission. Moreover, we should construct the procedure of ordinary trial and summary tiral and criminal speedy trial. Specifically, we should perfect the system of leniency based on peccavil, and reform the mode of proving in summary trial, and transform the criminal speedy procedure to criminal penalty order.
- 발행기관:
- 법학연구소
- 분류:
- 기초법