修复性司法的理论和实践反思

发布时间：2018-03-21 17:20

本文选题：修复性司法　切入点：融合性羞辱　出处：《中国政法大学》2011年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：作为区别于国家正式司法的一种认识和处理犯罪的尝试,修复性司法自20世纪70年代产生以来就在世界范围内产生了重大的影响,包括我国在内的很多国家都在开展修复性司法的理论研究和相关实践,形成了一个相当活跃的学术领域。本文希望在已有研究的基础上从规范性和实证性相结合的角度对修复性司法的理论和实践提出批判性的反思。与报应主义司法不同,修复性司法主张犯罪首先是对具体个人和人们关系的侵犯,重要的不是如何对加害人施以刑罚而是对已有伤害的修复,受到犯罪影响的受害人、加害人和社区有权参与到犯罪的处理过程之中。修复性司法吸收了受害人权利运动、女性主义运动、后现代思潮和原著民运动对国家正式司法体系的批判和各自的理论主张,批判了西方历史上国家司法对社区司法的取代是历史的进步这一过于简单的图景,主张从社区司法中寻找区别于国家正式司法的可能途径。它在批评支持国家刑罚权的刑罚理论基础上,提出了共和主义的刑事司法理论,主张在追求自由最大化的目标之下,如无必要应该尽可能少地运用刑事司法措施,重视个体在社会化过程中形成的道德良知对犯罪的抵制作用,尤其是社区对“融合性羞辱”的运用。但是,无论是社区司法还是“融合性羞辱”中的社区都面临着现实的挑战。实践方面,本文根据修复性司法的核心价值和原则对修复性司法的主要模式进行批判性的分析,并运用现有的实证材料对它们的效果进行评价。其中降低再犯率不能得到实证材料的有力支持,但是,这并不影响对修复性司法的积极评价,因为与受害人、加害人和社区其他成员对修复性司法过程和结果的满意度相比,它并不是最重要的指标。对实践的分析能够加深对修复性司法的认识,当修复和修复性被理解为一个程度性问题时,国家正式司法体系也可能具有部分的修复性。对量刑圈的分析提醒我们注意社区并非总是一个随时可加以利用的资源,它可能存在偏见、歧视和力量不对等,它在参与修复性司法过程的同时自身就需要改变。理论和实践的分析表明社区问题是修复性司法学者需要面对的一个最重要的问题。本文在前面讨论的基础上对“社区”在修复性司法中的含义进行了总结,对现实中来自各方面的质疑进行了概括,并且在修复性司法学者相关观点的基础上进一步对这些问题作出回应。与社区问题相关的是社会不公正问题,由于这个问题超出了社区的范围与更大范围的结构性过程相连。所以,本文从两个方面对此做出回应:一方面,修复性司法为那些与具体犯罪相关的社会不公正问题在社区内提出讨论提供了机会,这就可能推动社区层面的努力来部分地改变结构性过程;另一方面,作为公共空间,修复性司法对社会不公正的讨论能够和来自其他公共空间的声音汇合起来形成公共舆论,如果公共舆论足够强大就可能影响国家的政治决策,甚至引起国家制度层面的变革,而这对众多行动者参与的结构性过程所造成的社会不公正问题的解决是最重要的。
[Abstract]:An attempt to understand and deal with the crime as distinguished from national official justice, restorative justice since 1970s has been in the world has had a major impact, many countries including China, both in theoretical research and practice to carry out restorative justice, formed a very active academic field. In this paper, on the basis of the existing research from the combination of normative and empirical perspectives on theory and practice of restorative justice put forward critical reflection.
Unlike the retributive justice, restorative justice advocates first crime is a violation of the individual and the relationship between people, important is not how to impose penalties on the perpetrators of the damage but has been repaired, affected by a crime victim, the offender and the community have the right to participate in the process of crime. The absorption of restorative justice the victim rights movement, the feminist movement, critique of postmodernism and indigenous movement to the national official judicial system and their theory, criticizes the national judicial history of the west is the historical progress of this picture is too simple to replace the judicial community, community justice advocates from the possible ways for different from the national judicial official the penalty. Its theoretical basis in support of criticism of the national penalty power, put forward the theory of criminal judicial republicanism, in favor of the pursuit of freedom to maximize. Under the standard, if not necessary should be as little as possible the use of criminal judicial measures, attach importance to the individual in the social process of the formation of moral conscience to resist crime, especially the use of "community integration shame". However, whether it is community justice or "fusion of shame" in the community are facing the challenge of the reality.
In practice, this paper makes a critical analysis according to the core values and principles of restorative justice to the main mode of restorative justice, and evaluate the effect of using existing empirical materials to them. Which reduce the recidivism rate can not get strong support, but the empirical material, this does not affect the positive evaluation of restorative justice. As compared with the victim, the offender and the other members of the community satisfaction of restorative justice and the outcome of the process, it is not the most important parameters. The practice analysis can deepen our understanding of restorative justice, when repair and repair are interpreted as a degree of problem, national judicial system may also have repair parts. Analysis of the sentencing circle remind us of the community is not always a ready to use the resources, it may exist prejudice, discrimination and unequal power, It needs to change as it participates in the restorative justice process.
The analysis of theory and practice show that the community is one of the most important problems of restorative justice scholars need to face. Based on the discussed earlier on the "community" in restorative justice meaning are summarized, on the question from the reality are summarized, based on related and restorative justice scholars' opinions on these issues further respond. Related community is the problem of social injustice, because the problem is beyond the scope of the process of community structure and a wider range of connected. Therefore, this paper from the two aspects of this response: on the one hand, restorative justice for those related to the specific crime the social injustice provides the opportunity to discuss in the community, which may promote the community level efforts to partially change the structural process; on the other hand, as a public space, repair Discussion on complex judicial injustice to and from other public space sound combining the formation of public opinion, public opinion is strong enough if it could affect national political decisions, and even cause the national system level changes caused by structural process and the solution of many actors involved in the social injustice is the most important.

【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D916

【参考文献】