本文選題：檢察機(jī)關(guān) + 量刑��； 參考：《黑龍江大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：正義一直是法律所追求的最高價(jià)值目標(biāo)，為了能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)這一價(jià)值目標(biāo)，我國不斷在司法改革上進(jìn)行探索，引進(jìn)國外先進(jìn)立法制度和立法理念，結(jié)合我國國情，設(shè)計(jì)出富有特色的司法制度。在一次又一次地司法改革浪潮之中，檢察機(jī)關(guān)量刑建議制度逐漸被學(xué)術(shù)界和司法界所認(rèn)可，并先后在全國多地的檢察機(jī)關(guān)進(jìn)行試點(diǎn)。經(jīng)過多年的實(shí)踐，量刑建議制度不斷地發(fā)展。與此同時(shí)，我國在以最高人民檢察院為代表的司法力量也相繼出臺(tái)了一些專門性的指導(dǎo)意見，由最高人民法院、最高人民檢察院、公安部、國家安全部及司法部聯(lián)合制定的《關(guān)于規(guī)范量刑程序若干問題的意見（試行）》已于2010年10月1日在全國范圍內(nèi)實(shí)施，這標(biāo)志著我國在量刑建議規(guī)范化改革上取得了階段性的重要成果，2013年1月1日最高人民檢察院、最高人民法院的司法解釋又為量刑建議提供了明確的司法依據(jù),也標(biāo)志著我國近年在刑事訴訟司法活動(dòng)邁上了一個(gè)新的臺(tái)階。量刑建議制度的正式確立將有助于推動(dòng)刑事訴訟程序的規(guī)范化和科學(xué)化，量刑建議制度的確立有利于完善刑事訴訟程序，有利于維護(hù)訴訟當(dāng)事人的合法權(quán)益，有利于提高刑事訴訟的效率,實(shí)現(xiàn)程序正義和實(shí)體正義的高度統(tǒng)一，實(shí)現(xiàn)法律效果和社會(huì)效果的高度統(tǒng)一。但是由于量刑建議在我國從提出到在司法解釋之中確立，尚不足二十年的時(shí)間，且至今仍未在刑事訴訟法中得以確立，在司法實(shí)踐經(jīng)驗(yàn)、法律效力位階、制度的完備性等方面均存在著一些問題，屬于正處于發(fā)育階段的刑事訴訟制度，，我國應(yīng)當(dāng)充分學(xué)習(xí)和借鑒國外已經(jīng)成熟的先進(jìn)立法理念，結(jié)合我國的實(shí)際情況，對(duì)量刑建議制度進(jìn)行發(fā)展完善，也量刑建議在我國還屬于正處于發(fā)育階段的刑事訴訟制度，還存在著這樣那樣的問題，尚需要通過大量的司法實(shí)務(wù)檢驗(yàn)，以積累更多的司法經(jīng)驗(yàn)，為該制度的發(fā)展完善奠定實(shí)踐基礎(chǔ)。
[Abstract]:Justice has always been the supreme value goal pursued by the law. In order to realize this value goal, our country has been continuously exploring the judicial reform, introducing advanced foreign legislative systems and legislative ideas, and combining with the national conditions of our country. Design a characteristic judicial system. In the tide of judicial reform again and again, the sentencing recommendation system of procuratorial organs has been gradually recognized by the academic and judicial circles, and has been carried out in many places of the country's procuratorial organs to pilot. After many years of practice, sentencing suggestion system has been developing continuously. At the same time, our judicial forces, represented by the Supreme people's Procuratorate, have also issued a number of specialized guidance opinions one after another, by the Supreme people's Court, the Supreme people's Procuratorate, and the Ministry of Public Security. The opinion on several issues concerning the Regulation of sentencing procedures (pilot), jointly developed by the Ministry of National Security and the Ministry of Justice, was implemented nationwide on 1 October 2010, This indicates that China has made important achievements in the reform of the standardization of sentencing proposals. On January 1, 2013, the judicial interpretation of the Supreme people's Procuratorate and the Supreme people's Court provided a clear judicial basis for sentencing recommendations. It also marks a new step in the judicial activities of criminal procedure in China in recent years. The formal establishment of sentencing suggestion system will help to promote the standardization and scientization of criminal procedure. The establishment of sentencing suggestion system will help to perfect criminal procedure and safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of litigants. It is helpful to improve the efficiency of criminal procedure, to realize the high unity of procedural justice and substantive justice, and to realize the high unity of legal effect and social effect. However, the sentencing recommendation has not been established in the criminal procedure law for less than 20 years since it was put forward and established in the judicial interpretation in our country, and has not been established in the criminal procedure law so far, in the judicial practice experience, the legal effect rank, There are some problems in the completeness of the system, which belongs to the criminal procedure system in the developing stage. Our country should fully learn and learn from the advanced legislative concepts of foreign countries and combine the actual situation of our country. The system of sentencing suggestion has been developed and perfected, and sentencing advice is still in the developing stage of the criminal procedure system in our country. There are still some problems, which still need to pass a large number of judicial practice tests. To accumulate more judicial experience, for the development and improvement of the system lay a practical foundation.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：黑龍江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：D926.3

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 周光權(quán);量刑規(guī)范化:可行性與難題[J];法律適用;2004年04期

2 陳興良;;寬嚴(yán)相濟(jì)刑事政策研究[J];法學(xué)雜志;2006年01期

3 劉星;;從量刑建議權(quán)的價(jià)值取向談如何開展量刑建議改革[J];法學(xué)雜志;2006年02期

4 陳嵐;;西方國家的量刑建議制度及其比較[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2008年01期

5 丁正紅;;我國刑事證據(jù)展示制度的構(gòu)建與完善[J];法學(xué);2007年07期

6 王志麗;;量刑建議權(quán)與刑事訴訟法的完善[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年13期

7 史海涵;;檢察機(jī)關(guān)量刑建議權(quán)基本理論探析[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年26期

8 張俊;;淺析如何完善我國的定罪量刑標(biāo)準(zhǔn)[J];法制與社會(huì);2010年19期

9 潘申明;周靜;;論量刑建議的運(yùn)行機(jī)制[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2009年05期

10 李凱;邊志偉;;量刑建議環(huán)節(jié)羈押表現(xiàn)評(píng)價(jià)的公訴[J];中國檢察官;2010年02期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 張國軒;檢察機(jī)關(guān)量刑建議問題研究[D];中國政法大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：1855027