論我國臺灣地區(qū)刑事協(xié)商制度
本文選題:臺灣地區(qū) + 認罪協(xié)商 ; 參考:《吉林大學》2012年碩士論文
【摘要】:近些年來,社會發(fā)展日新月異,各種社會問題層出不窮,矛盾與沖突不時發(fā)生,新型的犯罪也開始增多,所以導致世界各國的刑事審判面臨巨大的壓力,司法工作者們每日都要處理大量的刑事案件,法官檢察官的工作負荷不減反而增加,依靠原有的普通程序與簡易程序,是不能解決這些問題的。因此,上世紀八十年代初期以來,西方犯罪學界將協(xié)商和解制度引入刑事司法領域,在世界范圍內提出了恢復性正義的理論,美國早在上世紀初就已經在刑事實際案例中,應用了這種協(xié)商的制度,即美國的辯訴交易制度,其他大陸法系國家也以此為鑒,建立了各國的協(xié)商性司法制度,并予以明確的立法規(guī)范。 我國臺灣地區(qū)也于2004年3月23日經立法院三讀通過刑事訴訟法的修正草案,增訂第七編之一協(xié)商程序,并于同年的4月7日公布實施。該協(xié)商程序在制定之初,關于其正當性及利弊得失,在臺灣地區(qū)一直都是備受爭議的議題,反對者認為,經認罪協(xié)商法的審判結果會令人質疑,對采行這種制度有很多的顧慮;而贊成該制度的臺灣學者卻認為即使調查全部的證據和證人,最后的審判結果也未必正確,認罪協(xié)商不僅可以節(jié)省大量時間及昂貴的司法資源,符合訴訟經濟的要求,更可以針對每一個不同的被告作出最適合的刑罰,達到了刑罰的目的,順應了當下的司法實際的需要。 臺灣地區(qū)的刑事訴訟法第455條之2到第455條之11,是增訂的協(xié)商程序的法律條文,雖然只有短短10個條文,但卻對協(xié)商程序應如何開啟,程序如何進行,法院最終如何裁判等,均作出了明確的規(guī)范。對于協(xié)商適用的范圍,立法中作出了界定,除死刑、無期徒刑、最少三年以上有期徒刑的犯罪或是由高等法院管轄的第一審案件外,案件都可以從檢察官提起公訴開始,到第一審言辭辯論終結前,進行協(xié)商,這樣明確了臺灣地區(qū)的刑事協(xié)商制度的適用案件范圍以及適用的階段。這一協(xié)商程序的啟動,可以完全由檢察官根據案件的情況來決定,也可以依被告或者其代理人、辯護人的申請,并且啟動的條件還要包括法院的同意,及被害人意見的征求。在滿足上面的啟動條件后,檢察官才可于審判外進行協(xié)商程序,與被告達成協(xié)商合意且被告認罪的,檢察官可以申請法院改依協(xié)商程序而作判決。具體的協(xié)商事項包括以下幾點,一、被告表示愿意接受所處的刑罰或愿意接受緩刑的宣告。二、被告向被害人道歉。三、被告向被害人支付相當數額的賠償金。四、被告向公庫或指定的公益團體、地方自治團體支付一定的金額。 雖然,該制度的建立從一定程度上順應了世界刑事司法的發(fā)展潮流,但是臺灣地區(qū)刑事協(xié)商程序的立法規(guī)定對于協(xié)商的申請主體、申請條件、適用案件類型、協(xié)商的事項等設定了諸多的限制,這對于協(xié)商程序在司法實際中的適用造成了相當程度的局限,導致臺灣地區(qū)的司法實踐中,協(xié)商程序的適用程度很低,所以,對于臺灣地區(qū)的刑事協(xié)商制度的未來完善,應當從提升適用協(xié)商制度的意愿,提供公開透明的協(xié)商環(huán)境,采用全面強制辯護制度,改進協(xié)商程序的救濟制度這幾個方面來著手。 我國的新審議通過的刑事訴訟法修正案,也增訂了我國的刑事和解程序,但相應的規(guī)定還不是很具體,還有很多立法上的空白之處,所以,本文通過對我國臺灣地區(qū)的刑事協(xié)商制度的研究,,為我國的刑事和解完善帶來一些新的啟示。
[Abstract]:In recent years, the social development is changing with each passing day, various social problems emerge in endlessly, contradictions and conflicts occur from time to time, and the new type of crime has also begun to increase. Therefore, the criminal trial of all countries in the world is facing enormous pressure. The judicial workers should deal with a large number of criminal cases every day. In the early 80s of last century, since the early 80s of the last century, the western criminology has introduced the system of negotiation and reconciliation into the field of criminal justice, and put forward the theory of restorative justice in the world. The United States has already applied this in the early century in criminal cases. The system of negotiation, that is, the system of plea bargaining in the United States, as well as in other continental law countries, has established a negotiated judicial system and a clear legislative norm.
In the Taiwan region of China, on 23 March 2004, the revised draft of the criminal procedure law was read through the three reading of the revised draft of the criminal procedure law by the Legislative Council on 23 March 2004, and was published in April 7th of the same year. The results of the pleadings and consultative law will be questionable and have a lot of concern for the adoption of such a system, while the Taiwan scholars in favour of the system believe that even if all the evidence and witnesses are investigated, the final result of the trial may not be correct, and the pleadings can not only save a large amount of time and expensive judicial resources, but also meet the requirements of the litigation economy. It can also make the most suitable punishment for each defendant, which achieves the purpose of punishment and conforms to the needs of the current judicial reality.
In the Taiwan area, the criminal procedure law of the Taiwan region is 2 to 455th. It is the legal provision of the amended negotiation procedure. Although there are only 10 articles, it has made clear norms on how the negotiation procedure should be opened, how the procedure is carried out, and how the court finally judges. The scope of the consultation is defined in the legislation. The death penalty, life imprisonment, the least three years of the crime of imprisonment or the first case under the jurisdiction of the high court, the case can be initiated from the prosecutor and before the end of the first trial debate, which makes it clear that the applicable scope and the applicable stage of the criminal consultation system in the Taiwan region. The initiation of a consultative procedure can be completely decided by the prosecutor in accordance with the case, or by the defendant or its agent, and the application of the defender in accordance with the defendant or its agent, and the conditions for the initiation of the prosecutor should include the consent of the court and the solicitation of the opinions of the victims. When the negotiation agrees and the defendant pleads for the crime, the prosecutor may apply to the court to make a decision in accordance with the negotiation procedure. The specific negotiation matters include the following points: first, the defendant expresses the willingness to accept the penalty or the declaration of probation. Two, the defendant apologizes to the victim. Three, the defendant is paid a considerable amount of compensation to the victim. Four, the defendant is accused of paying a considerable amount of compensation. To pay a certain sum to a public library or a designated public welfare organization or a local autonomous organization.
Although the establishment of the system has conformed to the trend of the development of criminal justice in the world to a certain extent, the legislative provisions of the criminal negotiation procedure in Taiwan have set many restrictions on the subject of the application, the application conditions, the type of application of the case, and the matters of consultation. This has resulted in the application of the negotiation procedure in the judicial practice. To a considerable extent, in the judicial practice of Taiwan, the application of the negotiation procedure is very low. Therefore, for the future improvement of the criminal consultation system in Taiwan, it is necessary to improve the willingness to apply the system of consultation, provide open and transparent consultative environment, adopt a comprehensive compulsory defense system, and improve the relief system of the negotiation procedure. Several aspects to start.
The amendment of the criminal procedure law adopted in our country's new consideration also adds to the criminal reconciliation procedure of our country, but the corresponding provisions are not very specific and there are many gaps in the legislation. Therefore, this paper brings some new enlightenment to the perfection of the criminal reconciliation in our country through the study of the criminal consultation system in the Taiwan region of China.
【學位授予單位】:吉林大學
【學位級別】:碩士
【學位授予年份】:2012
【分類號】:D925.2;D997
【相似文獻】
相關期刊論文 前10條
1 黃河;;德國刑事訴訟中協(xié)商制度淺析[J];環(huán)球法律評論;2010年01期
2 張聲瑤;玩忽職守 錯兌稻種 直接責任人被追究刑事責任[J];人民司法;1982年10期
3 錢紹成;關于我國當前刑事犯罪主要原因和刑事犯罪趨勢的思考[J];青海社會科學;1995年04期
4 李記華;廣告犯罪的刑事責任探究[J];國家檢察官學院學報;1995年02期
5 熊秋紅;刑事救濟程序的新發(fā)展[J];中外法學;1996年03期
6 盧文華;已調解賠償的刑事案件可追究行為人的刑事責任[J];中央政法管理干部學院學報;1996年04期
7 馬克昌;論刑事責任與刑罰[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;1996年02期
8 李明剛;產品質量責任中的刑事責任[J];技術監(jiān)督實用技術;1998年06期
9 ;一體化刑事法學研究的力作《刑事科學論》已經出版[J];公安大學學報;1999年03期
10 賴宇,趙樹榮,高娜;論刑事訴訟價值[J];法制與社會發(fā)展;1999年04期
相關會議論文 前10條
1 詹正勇;;引進和建立控辯協(xié)商制度的構想[A];使命與發(fā)展——第四屆西部律師發(fā)展論壇論文集[C];2011年
2 郭高;;我國刑事檢察權的合理配置與完善——經濟學分析[A];第五屆國家高級檢察官論壇論文集[C];2009年
3 鞏富文;姚宏科;;刑事從寬政策之困境探析[A];第三屆國家高級檢察官論壇論文集[C];2007年
4 薛培;王波;白文俊;;寬嚴相濟的刑事司法適用機制研究[A];第二屆國家高級檢察官論壇論文集[C];2006年
5 張靜;;刑事證據收集的邏輯進程[A];第十六屆全國法律邏輯學術討論會論文(成就·反思·前瞻——中國法律邏輯三十年)[C];2008年
6 杝怲夫;;有曑降低本澳刑事kx尙年焌的墜解[A];少年刑事司法制度學術研討會論文集[C];2001年
7 鄭青;;我國刑事審前程序的重構[A];首屆國家高級檢察官論壇論文集[C];2005年
8 彭健夫;;香港刑事尙任年齡研究[A];青少年違法及藥物濫用防治對策學術研討會論文集[C];1999年
9 龔恒超;;董必武人民司法思想與外來涉罪未成年人的刑事司法保護[A];董必武法學思想研究文集(第十輯)[C];2010年
10 上海市人民檢察院第一分院量刑監(jiān)督制度研究課題組;沈新康;;和諧社會語境中量刑監(jiān)督的實踐與制度構建[A];第三屆國家高級檢察官論壇論文集[C];2007年
相關重要報紙文章 前10條
1 本報記者 李R肌”頸ㄍㄑ對
本文編號:2113092
本文鏈接:http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/guojifa/2113092.html