认罪认罚从宽程序构建研究

发布时间：2018-03-07 06:19

本文选题：认罪认罚从宽诉讼程序　切入点：刑事速裁程序　出处：《山东大学》2017年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：受我国社会流动加快、经济差距进一步拉大等因素的影响,我国刑事案件数量特别是轻微刑事案件数量迅速增长,伴随着劳教制度的废除、刑事处罚范围的扩大,如何优化司法资源配置、提高刑事案件办理效率,是司法实践中急需解决的难题,也是司法改革的重中之重。认罪认罚从宽司法改革正是在这一背景下出台,同时也是我国当前出现的刑罚轻缓化、司法人权等思潮在国家制度层面的反映。然而,按照此次司法改革的设计,认罪认罚从宽诉讼程序的构建与我国传统的司法理念和制度并不完全相符,一是在程序构建过程中对我国刑事实体法价值存在一定的冲击,二是与我国当前的职权主义诉讼模式也存在一定的矛盾。同时,由于前期刑事速裁程序的有关规定相对简单,一方面给各地司法机关留下了充足的改革空间以试行各项程序简化举措,一些举措也确实取得了不错的效果,大幅提高了轻微刑事案件办理效率;另一方面也造成了改革过程中的一些混乱。在前期部分地区开展的刑事案件速裁程序二年期试点工作刚刚结束之际,最高人民法院等又出台意见继续就认罪认罚从宽制度进行试点,也说明了试点过程中改革遇到问题的复杂性。因此,根据我国当前刑事诉讼程序和价值理念,在总结试点前期经验和存在问题的基础上提出合理化建议,对认罪认罚从宽诉讼程序的完善具有重要的意义。认罪认罚从宽诉讼程序提出的背景和理念支撑,是衡量相关规定出台是否具有必要性的依据,也为该程序的构建发挥导向作用,因此需要进行梳理。通过梳理,可以看出进行认罪认罚从宽改革具有重要的现实意义,也是遵循刑事政策的动态发展客观规律的举措。当然,《关于授权最高人民法院、最高人民检察院在部分地区开展刑事案件认罪认罚从宽制度试点工作的决定》(以下简称《试点决定》)出台之前,近年来已经有了刑事案件快速办理的立法规定和刑事速裁程序的试点工作。简易程序和"轻刑快审"程序存在的问题,也是刑事速裁程序要解决的问题,刑事速裁程序在试点过程中也在一定程度上缓解了这些问题。这些都能够为接下来开展的认罪认罚诉讼程序改革提供经验参考。该诉讼程序在构建和适用中存在一定的困惑,包括犯罪嫌疑人和被告人仅具备形式认罪而非真心悔罪的案件是否从宽以及如何认定的问题,以及与我国当前职权主义诉讼模式存在的冲突问题。基于认罪认罚从宽司法改革的背景、宗旨,结合改革中的问题分析,提出完善认罪认罚从宽诉讼程序的一些建议:建立科学统一的认罪认罚从宽诉讼程序,进一步区分对待认罪与认罚,完善案件办理方式提高诉讼效率,落实值班律师援助制度等措施有效保障当事人权利,推动量刑规范化。同时,加强技术运用,强化检察机关职能,健全司法监督机制,也是完善认罪认罚从宽诉讼程序的必要保障。
[Abstract]:Influenced by the acceleration of social mobility and the further widening of the economic gap, the number of criminal cases, especially minor criminal cases, has increased rapidly in China. With the abolition of the system of re-education through labour, the scope of criminal punishment has expanded. How to optimize the allocation of judicial resources and improve the efficiency of handling criminal cases is a difficult problem that needs to be solved in judicial practice and is also the most important part of judicial reform. At the same time, it is also a reflection of the current trend of thought in China, such as light punishment, judicial human rights, and so on. However, according to the design of this judicial reform, The construction of lenient procedure of guilty plea and punishment is not completely consistent with the traditional judicial concept and system of our country. One is that there is a certain impact on the value of criminal substantive law in the process of procedure construction. Second, there is a certain contradiction with the current mode of the power doctrine litigation in our country. At the same time, because of the relative simplicity of the relevant provisions of the criminal quick adjudication procedure in the early stage, On the one hand, enough reform space has been left to the local judicial organs to try out various procedural simplification measures, and some measures have indeed achieved good results, greatly improving the efficiency of handling minor criminal cases; On the other hand, it has also caused some confusion in the reform process. At the end of the two-year pilot work on the criminal case expediting procedure carried out in earlier parts of the country, The Supreme people's Court and others issued opinions to continue to pilot the lenient system of guilty pleading and penalizing, which also shows the complexity of the problems encountered in the reform in the course of the pilot. Therefore, according to the current criminal procedure and the value concept of our country, On the basis of summing up the early experience and existing problems of the trial, it is of great significance for the improvement of the lenient lawsuit procedure to admit and punish the guilty plea, the background and the idea support of the lenient lawsuit procedure. It is the basis to measure whether the relevant regulations are necessary or not, and also play a guiding role for the construction of the procedure. Therefore, we need to comb. Through combing, we can see that the reform of leniency of guilty pleas and punishment has important practical significance. It is also a move to follow the objective law of the dynamic development of criminal policy. Of course, [concerning] authorizing the Supreme people's Court, Decision of the Supreme people's Procuratorate on the pilot work on the lenient system of guilty plea and punishment in Criminal cases in some regions before the introduction of the trial decision (hereinafter referred to as "the pilot decision"), In recent years, there have been legislative provisions for the speedy handling of criminal cases and pilot work on criminal expedited adjudication procedures. The problems existing in the summary procedure and the "light punishment quick trial" procedure are also the problems to be solved by the criminal speedy adjudication procedure. These problems are alleviated to a certain extent in the process of trial. All of these can provide experience reference for the reform of plea admission and punishment procedure in the future. There is some confusion in the construction and application of this procedure. Including the question of whether suspects and defendants are lenient in cases where they have only a formal confession rather than genuine repentance and how to identify it, Based on the background and purpose of lenient judicial reform, this paper analyzes the problems in the reform. Some suggestions are put forward to perfect the lenient procedure of guilty admission and punishment: to establish a scientific and unified lenient lawsuit procedure, to further distinguish between guilty plea and punishment, to perfect the way of handling cases, and to improve the efficiency of litigation. The implementation of the duty lawyer assistance system and other measures to effectively protect the rights of the parties, promote the standardization of sentencing. At the same time, strengthen the use of technology, strengthen the functions of procuratorial organs, improve the judicial supervision mechanism, It is also the necessary guarantee to perfect the lenient procedure of pleading guilty and penalizing.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D925.2

【相似文献】