反腐国际合作维度下量刑承诺制度的反思与完善——以死刑不引渡原则的司法应对为视角

发布时间：2018-06-01 09:04

本文选题：量刑承诺 + 死刑不引渡　；参考：《政法学刊》2016年03期

【摘要】：目前在我国引渡或遣返外逃贪腐人员的过程中,死刑不引渡一直是困扰反腐国际合作的最大程序障碍之一。由于我国贪污受贿犯罪中的死刑适用在相当长时间内继续存在,充分有效不判处死刑的量刑承诺就成为化解该障碍的主要途径。我国的反腐司法格局、引渡现状决定了我们要正视死刑适用的客观性。无论是人权与主权的博弈、制度是否违宪方面,还是适用法律是否平等方面,量刑承诺制度均存在诸多争议和不完善之处,但并不足以否定量刑承诺制度的合理性和必要性。通过借鉴美国、英国和日本等国量刑承诺制度的现状,在我国量刑承诺制度有效存续的前提下,我们应从透明化、制度化等方面对量刑承诺的流转程序、作出程序、承诺内容等方面加以完善,增强量刑承诺的有效性和权威性。
[Abstract]:At present, in the process of extradition or repatriation of corrupt persons, non-extradition of death penalty has been one of the biggest procedural obstacles puzzling international cooperation against corruption. Because the death penalty in the crime of corruption and bribery in our country continues to exist for a long time, the full and effective commitment of sentencing without the death penalty becomes the main way to resolve this obstacle. Our country's anti-corruption judicial pattern, extradition present situation decided that we should face up to the objectivity of death penalty application. Whether the game between human rights and sovereignty, whether the system is unconstitutional or the application of the law is equal, there are many disputes and imperfections in sentencing commitment system, but it is not enough to deny the rationality and necessity of sentencing commitment system. By drawing lessons from the present situation of sentencing commitment system in the United States, Britain and Japan, and under the premise of the effective existence of sentencing commitment system in our country, we should make procedures for the circulation procedure of sentencing commitment from the aspects of transparency and institutionalization. Commitment content and other aspects to improve, enhance the effectiveness and authority of sentencing commitments.
【作者单位】：上海市第一中级人民法院;上海市黄浦区人民法院;
【分类号】：D997.9;D914

【相似文献】