【摘要】：特別減輕制度對(duì)實(shí)現(xiàn)罪刑均衡與量刑公正具有重要的意義,但是該制度在司法適用中的運(yùn)行狀態(tài)并未如預(yù)想般順利,呈現(xiàn)被虛置的困境。因此開展破除特別減輕制度司法運(yùn)行障礙、恢復(fù)其應(yīng)有生命活力的營(yíng)救工作尤為緊迫。本文通過對(duì)核準(zhǔn)適用特別減輕處罰的案例的具體適用情況進(jìn)行實(shí)證研究,揭露該制度處于適用困境的根源。一方面,制度適用條件的規(guī)定過于抽象。"案件特殊情況"標(biāo)準(zhǔn)模糊,不利于審判人員認(rèn)定和裁斷;法定刑以下量刑幅度標(biāo)準(zhǔn)不一,判決結(jié)果難以做到統(tǒng)一協(xié)調(diào);另一方面,復(fù)核程序的規(guī)定不甚合理。收歸核準(zhǔn)權(quán)的規(guī)定過于嚴(yán)苛,導(dǎo)致該制度的運(yùn)行成本過高;復(fù)核范圍、期限等規(guī)定的缺失,無法實(shí)現(xiàn)實(shí)體與程序的良性互動(dòng);同時(shí),受制于重刑觀念和法院內(nèi)部的績(jī)效考核機(jī)制,特別減輕制度于夾縫中生存,實(shí)屬不易!特別減輕制度司法適用的學(xué)理反思旨在對(duì)該制度司法適用反映在實(shí)體和程序上的不足進(jìn)行理論上的討論批判,在對(duì)該制度的理論功能價(jià)值進(jìn)行肯定的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)爭(zhēng)議問題各方觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行比較分析,得到有助于完善特別減輕制度的回應(yīng)。完善特別減輕制度的出路在于對(duì)該制度的適用規(guī)則補(bǔ)充設(shè)置,首先從制度本身出發(fā),典型"案件特殊情況"公布指導(dǎo),增補(bǔ)相應(yīng)的減輕處罰量刑規(guī)則,規(guī)范核準(zhǔn)程序中復(fù)核期限、改判權(quán)等的設(shè)置,這樣才能化解制度過于籠統(tǒng)難以把握適用的弊端,增加制度運(yùn)行的可行性。其次,特別減輕制度最大限度的適用仍需要相應(yīng)完善的配套程序的輔助,嚴(yán)格規(guī)范裁判適用及復(fù)核理由、設(shè)定監(jiān)督制約的審查制度以及建立案例數(shù)據(jù)庫(kù),如此才能保障該制度符合立法精神的適用功效,釋放出特別減輕制度應(yīng)有生命活力。
[Abstract]:Especially the system of lightening is of great significance to realize the balance of crime and punishment and the justice of sentencing, but the operating state of the system in the judicial application is not as smooth as expected, showing the dilemma of being fictitious. Therefore, it is urgent to carry out the rescue work to break down the system's judicial obstacles and restore its vitality. In this paper, the author makes an empirical study on the specific application of the case of approving the application of special mitigated punishment, and reveals the root of the difficulty in the application of the system. On the one hand, the provisions of the conditions for application of the system are too abstract. " The standard of the special circumstances of the case is vague, which is not conducive to the determination and adjudication of the judge; the standard of the sentencing range below the statutory penalty is different, and the result of the judgment is difficult to be unified and coordinated; on the other hand, the provisions of the review procedure are not very reasonable. The stipulation of relegation to approval power is too strict, which leads to the excessive operating cost of the system; the absence of the provisions on the scope and duration of review, etc., which can not realize the benign interaction between entity and procedure; at the same time, Restricted by the concept of heavy punishment and the performance evaluation mechanism within the court, especially to alleviate the system in the gap to survive, is not easy! In particular, the theoretical reflection of reducing the judicial application of the system is aimed at criticizing theoretically the deficiencies reflected in the judicial application of the system in substance and procedure, and on the basis of affirming the theoretical functional value of the system. A comparative analysis of the views of the parties involved in the dispute is made, which is helpful to improve the special mitigation system. The way out to perfect the special mitigation system is to supplement the applicable rules of the system. First of all, from the system itself, the typical "special circumstances of the case" publish the guidance and supplement the corresponding rules of mitigating and sentencing. Only by standardizing the establishment of the time limit for review and the right of revision in the approval procedure can the system be solved that is too general to grasp the applicable malpractice and the feasibility of the system operation can be increased. Secondly, in order to reduce the application of the system to the maximum extent, it still needs to be supplemented by the corresponding perfect supporting procedures, strictly standardizing the reasons for the application and review of the adjudication, setting up the examination system of supervision and restriction, and establishing the case database. Only in this way can the system accord with the applicable effect of the legislative spirit and release the vitality of the special lightening system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：浙江大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉凌梅;;特殊減輕制度的司法適用及規(guī)范改進(jìn)[J];法律適用;2016年07期

2 彭文華;;酌定減輕處罰的自由裁量與技術(shù)制衡[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2016年03期

3 黃祥青;;減輕處罰情節(jié)的理解與適用[J];人民司法;2013年11期

4 �？饲�;;法定刑以下判處刑罰復(fù)核制度的適用[J];人民司法;2013年06期

5 李德光;;論特殊情況減輕處罰的適用——以最高人民法院公布的案例為視角[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2012年06期

6 李翔;;論我國(guó)刑法中的減輕處罰——兼評(píng)修正后《刑法》第63條第1款[J];中國(guó)刑事法雜志;2012年09期

7 李立眾;;修改酌定減輕處罰核準(zhǔn)主體之建議[J];人民檢察;2011年09期

8 馬鳳春;;論“減輕處罰”的幅度[J];法治研究;2011年01期

9 趙秉志;劉媛媛;;論當(dāng)前刑法改革中的酌定減輕處罰權(quán)[J];法學(xué);2010年12期

10 徐立;胡劍波;;“許霆案”減輕處罰的根據(jù)與幅度分析[J];法商研究;2009年05期

，

本文編號(hào)：2294304