論我國刑事和解制度的困境與完善
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-12-10 23:56
【摘要】：刑事和解，又稱被害人1與加害人2的和解（victim-offenderreconciliation，，簡(jiǎn)稱VOR），是指在刑事訴訟過程中，在調(diào)停人或其他組織的組織下，被害人和加害人在平等、自愿的基礎(chǔ)上，直接溝通、共同協(xié)商，就加害行為的危害后果達(dá)成處理協(xié)議，據(jù)此司法機(jī)關(guān)對(duì)加害人減輕或免除刑事處罰的一種制度。它一改傳統(tǒng)刑事司法國家本位主義、重刑苛典強(qiáng)調(diào)用刑罰來懲治犯罪、矯正預(yù)防犯罪的理念，注重對(duì)被害人權(quán)益的保護(hù)、經(jīng)濟(jì)和精神上的彌補(bǔ)，注重對(duì)破壞的社會(huì)關(guān)系的修復(fù)，注重對(duì)加害人的人道矯正和改造，能較好的平衡國家社會(huì)、加害人和被害人三方利益，彌補(bǔ)傳統(tǒng)刑事司法的不足。 在恢復(fù)性司法在全球范圍內(nèi)強(qiáng)勁興起的國際環(huán)境下，大力推進(jìn)建設(shè)和諧社會(huì)和貫徹落實(shí)寬嚴(yán)相濟(jì)刑事政策的背景下，我國許多地方開始了刑事和解的實(shí)踐探索。2012年，新刑訴法從國家立法層面對(duì)刑事和解予以確認(rèn)，但相對(duì)西方國家三十多年的成功經(jīng)驗(yàn)，中國刑事和解還有很多理論和實(shí)踐問題有待完善，本文就從理論和實(shí)踐兩方面分析中國刑事和解所存在的沖突和挑戰(zhàn)，進(jìn)而在此基礎(chǔ)上尋求解決的方案。 在本文中，筆者首先分析了刑事和解在我國施行的必要性和可行性，其次，討論了刑事和解與刑法相關(guān)理論表面上的沖突，論證了刑事和解內(nèi)在實(shí)質(zhì)與刑法理論原意的和諧。再次，闡述了新刑訴法明確刑事和解后，刑事和解實(shí)踐與立法現(xiàn)狀的不統(tǒng)一以及其他刑事和解實(shí)踐中的困境，最后，從立法和配套機(jī)制方面對(duì)刑事和解制度提出了一些完善建議。
[Abstract]:Criminal reconciliation, also known as the reconciliation between victim 1 and perpetrator 2 (victim-offenderreconciliation, for short VOR), refers to the direct communication between the victim and the perpetrator on the basis of equality, willingness and direct communication in the course of criminal proceedings, under the organization of the mediator or other organization. Through joint consultation, we reach an agreement to deal with the harmful consequences of the injurious act, according to which the judicial organ mitigates or exempts the offender from criminal punishment. It has changed the traditional state orientation of the criminal justice system. The severe punishment emphasizes the punishment of crimes, corrects the concept of crime prevention, pays attention to the protection of the rights and interests of the victims, makes up for the economic and spiritual problems, and pays attention to the repair of the damaged social relations. Paying attention to the humane correction and reform of the victimizer can balance the national society, harm the interests of the victim and the victim, and make up for the shortcomings of the traditional criminal justice. In the context of the strong rise of restorative justice in the global international environment, vigorously promoting the construction of a harmonious society and carrying out the criminal policy of combining leniency and severe punishment, many places in China began to explore the practice of criminal reconciliation. The new Criminal procedure Law confirms the criminal reconciliation from the level of national legislation. However, compared with the successful experience of more than 30 years in western countries, there are still many theoretical and practical problems to be perfected in China's criminal reconciliation. This paper analyzes the conflicts and challenges in China's criminal reconciliation from both theoretical and practical aspects, and then seeks solutions on this basis. In this paper, the author first analyzes the necessity and feasibility of criminal reconciliation in China, secondly, discusses the apparent conflicts between criminal reconciliation and criminal law related theories, and demonstrates the harmony between the essence of criminal reconciliation and the original intention of criminal law theory. Thirdly, after the new criminal procedure law clarifies the criminal reconciliation, the practice of criminal reconciliation and the current situation of legislation are not unified, as well as other difficulties in the practice of criminal reconciliation. Finally, From the legislation and supporting mechanism of the criminal reconciliation system put forward some suggestions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2
本文編號(hào)：2371457
[Abstract]:Criminal reconciliation, also known as the reconciliation between victim 1 and perpetrator 2 (victim-offenderreconciliation, for short VOR), refers to the direct communication between the victim and the perpetrator on the basis of equality, willingness and direct communication in the course of criminal proceedings, under the organization of the mediator or other organization. Through joint consultation, we reach an agreement to deal with the harmful consequences of the injurious act, according to which the judicial organ mitigates or exempts the offender from criminal punishment. It has changed the traditional state orientation of the criminal justice system. The severe punishment emphasizes the punishment of crimes, corrects the concept of crime prevention, pays attention to the protection of the rights and interests of the victims, makes up for the economic and spiritual problems, and pays attention to the repair of the damaged social relations. Paying attention to the humane correction and reform of the victimizer can balance the national society, harm the interests of the victim and the victim, and make up for the shortcomings of the traditional criminal justice. In the context of the strong rise of restorative justice in the global international environment, vigorously promoting the construction of a harmonious society and carrying out the criminal policy of combining leniency and severe punishment, many places in China began to explore the practice of criminal reconciliation. The new Criminal procedure Law confirms the criminal reconciliation from the level of national legislation. However, compared with the successful experience of more than 30 years in western countries, there are still many theoretical and practical problems to be perfected in China's criminal reconciliation. This paper analyzes the conflicts and challenges in China's criminal reconciliation from both theoretical and practical aspects, and then seeks solutions on this basis. In this paper, the author first analyzes the necessity and feasibility of criminal reconciliation in China, secondly, discusses the apparent conflicts between criminal reconciliation and criminal law related theories, and demonstrates the harmony between the essence of criminal reconciliation and the original intention of criminal law theory. Thirdly, after the new criminal procedure law clarifies the criminal reconciliation, the practice of criminal reconciliation and the current situation of legislation are not unified, as well as other difficulties in the practice of criminal reconciliation. Finally, From the legislation and supporting mechanism of the criminal reconciliation system put forward some suggestions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘇州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前5條
1 李潔;;刑事和解的機(jī)理研究[J];揚(yáng)州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2012年03期
2 宋英輝;郭云忠;李哲;羅海敏;何挺;馮詔鋒;王貞會(huì);;我國刑事和解實(shí)證分析[J];中國法學(xué);2008年05期
3 羅樹中;李立群;;湖南刑事和解實(shí)踐模式考析——兼論人民監(jiān)督員介入刑事和解的可行性[J];中國刑事法雜志;2009年12期
4 張明楷;芻議刑法面前人人平等[J];中國刑事法雜志;1999年01期
5 張勇;顧文;林倩;;刑事和解中檢察機(jī)關(guān)能動(dòng)司法的制度選擇——基于上海經(jīng)驗(yàn)的實(shí)證研究[J];政治與法律;2010年11期
本文編號(hào)：2371457
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/susongfa/2371457.html
最近更新
教材專著
