德国刑事协商制度的新发展及其启示

发布时间：2018-03-31 04:07

本文选题：德国宪法法院　切入点：协商制度　出处：《环球法律评论》2017年03期

【摘要】：德国联邦宪法法院于2013年3月19日就协商制度合宪性作出判决,肯定了协商制度的合宪性,同时,对《德国刑事诉讼法》中的协商制度条款作出大量解释。这一判决在若干方面推动了德国协商制度的新发展,例如,明确法官发现实质真实义务的宪法渊源、强化了法官的职权调查制度、进一步限定协商制度的适用范围以及扩充法院承担透明和记录义务的内容。德国联邦宪法法院对协商制度也作出了若干方面的限制,理由在于该制度违反职权主义原则、违反透明和记录义务,协商量刑实践亦有违法律规定等。在我国建构认罪认罚从宽制度时,可在法官职权调查原则、记录和透明义务、防范量刑"剪刀差"以及上诉机制等方面借鉴德国协商制度的经验。
[Abstract]:The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany, in its judgement of 19 March 2013 on the constitutionality of the consultative system, affirmed the constitutionality of the consultative system and, at the same time, The provisions of the consultation system in the German Code of Criminal procedure have been extensively interpreted. This decision has contributed to the new development of the German consultation system in several ways, for example, by clarifying the constitutional origin of the substantive and genuine obligation found by the judge, Strengthening the system of ex officio investigations of judges, further limiting the scope of application of the consultative system and expanding the content of the Court's transparency and recording obligations. The Federal Constitutional Court of Germany has also imposed a number of restrictions on the consultative system, The reason lies in the fact that the system violates the principle of authority, violates the obligations of transparency and record, and also violates the legal provisions in the practice of negotiation and sentencing. When establishing a lenient system of confession, admission and punishment in our country, the principle of investigation of judges' powers, the obligation of recording and the obligation of transparency can be obtained. To guard against sentencing "scissors" and appeal mechanism to learn from the experience of German consultation system.
【作者单位】：南开大学法学院;
【基金】：中央高校基本科研业务费资助项目“认罪认罚从宽制度试点实证研究”(63172062)的研究成果南开大学亚洲研究中心资助
【分类号】：D951.6;DD914

【相似文献】