本文選題：認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬訴訟程序　切入點(diǎn)：刑事速裁程序　出處：《山東大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：受我國(guó)社會(huì)流動(dòng)加快、經(jīng)濟(jì)差距進(jìn)一步拉大等因素的影響,我國(guó)刑事案件數(shù)量特別是輕微刑事案件數(shù)量迅速增長(zhǎng),伴隨著勞教制度的廢除、刑事處罰范圍的擴(kuò)大,如何優(yōu)化司法資源配置、提高刑事案件辦理效率,是司法實(shí)踐中急需解決的難題,也是司法改革的重中之重。認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬司法改革正是在這一背景下出臺(tái),同時(shí)也是我國(guó)當(dāng)前出現(xiàn)的刑罰輕緩化、司法人權(quán)等思潮在國(guó)家制度層面的反映。然而,按照此次司法改革的設(shè)計(jì),認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬訴訟程序的構(gòu)建與我國(guó)傳統(tǒng)的司法理念和制度并不完全相符,一是在程序構(gòu)建過程中對(duì)我國(guó)刑事實(shí)體法價(jià)值存在一定的沖擊,二是與我國(guó)當(dāng)前的職權(quán)主義訴訟模式也存在一定的矛盾。同時(shí),由于前期刑事速裁程序的有關(guān)規(guī)定相對(duì)簡(jiǎn)單,一方面給各地司法機(jī)關(guān)留下了充足的改革空間以試行各項(xiàng)程序簡(jiǎn)化舉措,一些舉措也確實(shí)取得了不錯(cuò)的效果,大幅提高了輕微刑事案件辦理效率;另一方面也造成了改革過程中的一些混亂。在前期部分地區(qū)開展的刑事案件速裁程序二年期試點(diǎn)工作剛剛結(jié)束之際,最高人民法院等又出臺(tái)意見繼續(xù)就認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬制度進(jìn)行試點(diǎn),也說明了試點(diǎn)過程中改革遇到問題的復(fù)雜性。因此,根據(jù)我國(guó)當(dāng)前刑事訴訟程序和價(jià)值理念,在總結(jié)試點(diǎn)前期經(jīng)驗(yàn)和存在問題的基礎(chǔ)上提出合理化建議,對(duì)認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬訴訟程序的完善具有重要的意義。認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬訴訟程序提出的背景和理念支撐,是衡量相關(guān)規(guī)定出臺(tái)是否具有必要性的依據(jù),也為該程序的構(gòu)建發(fā)揮導(dǎo)向作用,因此需要進(jìn)行梳理。通過梳理,可以看出進(jìn)行認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬改革具有重要的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義,也是遵循刑事政策的動(dòng)態(tài)發(fā)展客觀規(guī)律的舉措。當(dāng)然,《關(guān)于授權(quán)最高人民法院、最高人民檢察院在部分地區(qū)開展刑事案件認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬制度試點(diǎn)工作的決定》(以下簡(jiǎn)稱《試點(diǎn)決定》)出臺(tái)之前,近年來已經(jīng)有了刑事案件快速辦理的立法規(guī)定和刑事速裁程序的試點(diǎn)工作。簡(jiǎn)易程序和"輕刑快審"程序存在的問題,也是刑事速裁程序要解決的問題,刑事速裁程序在試點(diǎn)過程中也在一定程度上緩解了這些問題。這些都能夠?yàn)榻酉聛黹_展的認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰訴訟程序改革提供經(jīng)驗(yàn)參考。該訴訟程序在構(gòu)建和適用中存在一定的困惑,包括犯罪嫌疑人和被告人僅具備形式認(rèn)罪而非真心悔罪的案件是否從寬以及如何認(rèn)定的問題,以及與我國(guó)當(dāng)前職權(quán)主義訴訟模式存在的沖突問題�；谡J(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬司法改革的背景、宗旨,結(jié)合改革中的問題分析,提出完善認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬訴訟程序的一些建議:建立科學(xué)統(tǒng)一的認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬訴訟程序,進(jìn)一步區(qū)分對(duì)待認(rèn)罪與認(rèn)罰,完善案件辦理方式提高訴訟效率,落實(shí)值班律師援助制度等措施有效保障當(dāng)事人權(quán)利,推動(dòng)量刑規(guī)范化。同時(shí),加強(qiáng)技術(shù)運(yùn)用,強(qiáng)化檢察機(jī)關(guān)職能,健全司法監(jiān)督機(jī)制,也是完善認(rèn)罪認(rèn)罰從寬訴訟程序的必要保障。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 何允申;;怎樣認(rèn)識(shí)刑事案件持續(xù)上升的趨勢(shì)[J];公安大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);1988年06期

2 趙進(jìn)一;;無知釀成悲劇——本市外來人口刑事案件根源探[J];上海成人教育;1994年Z2期

3 郭浩善;論少年刑事案件審判中的觀念轉(zhuǎn)變[J];青少年犯罪問題;1997年04期

4 杜桂蘭;李某的行為是否構(gòu)成不移交刑事案件罪[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);1999年S1期

5 曹勇;刑事案件公開審判中的幾點(diǎn)注意事項(xiàng)[J];法律適用;1999年04期

6 ;中華全國(guó)律師協(xié)會(huì)關(guān)于律師辦理刑事案件的十項(xiàng)要求[J];中國(guó)律師;1999年07期

7 肖祖瀚;;報(bào)復(fù)社會(huì)嚴(yán)重刑事案件激增的四大主因[J];中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)周刊;2013年49期

8 何冰;;新加坡社會(huì)為何安定[J];人民文摘;2007年06期

9 ;信息[J];時(shí)代教育(先鋒國(guó)家歷史);2008年06期

10 李立;論刑事案件中犯罪嫌疑人、被告人死亡的處理[J];中央政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2000年03期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前10條

1 洪源;;m鏨倌晷淌擄訃⺁u查制度的v|展、形成及其方戄和基本原RG[A];少年刑事司法制度學(xué)術(shù)研討會(huì)論文集[C];2001年

2 甘雅玲;郭中偉;劉明輝;陳占河;;刑事案件中動(dòng)物毛發(fā)的掃描電鏡研究[A];第三屆全國(guó)掃描電子顯微學(xué)會(huì)議論文集[C];2003年

3 饒輝華;;10年100件公眾關(guān)注刑事案件的普遍性問題探究[A];建設(shè)公平正義社會(huì)與刑事法律適用問題研究-全國(guó)法院第24屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄉ蟽?cè)）[C];2012年

4 呂娜娜;;論我國(guó)刑事案件二審開庭審理制度[A];當(dāng)代法學(xué)論壇（2008年第1輯）[C];2008年

5 樊京京;;醉酒駕駛機(jī)動(dòng)車刑事案件中血液酒精含量檢測(cè)若干問題探討[A];貴州法學(xué)（2014年第6期）[C];2014年

6 裴}，

本文編號(hào)：1578283