摘要
在认罪认罚从宽原则指导下,以效率为指向的刑事速裁程序的设置存在体系性缺失,不具有独立性品格。一方面,实务中有用其取代认罪认罚从宽制度的倾向;另一方面,它与刑事简易程序的适用界限不清、规则不明。德国的刑事处罚令制度承担了刑事诉讼程序中大量的分流功能,它以"书面审"的模式快速处理轻微刑事案件,强调检法两家意见的一致性,法院不得更改检察院的处刑建议。伴随着我国较重行政违法行为逐步入罪化的实体法处理模式的兴起,有必要借鉴德国刑事处罚令的有益经验,打造我国轻罪刑事案件的"书面审"速裁模式,让其"合法地"大量分担刑事诉讼程序繁简分流的功能,并以此助推实体法中轻重罪案件的划分及分层级的值班律师指定辩护制度的建立。
Under the guidance of the principle of criminal leniency,the efficiency-oriented fast-track criminal trial procedure is systematically lacking and does not have an independent character.On the one hand,the use of the fast-track criminal trial procedure has in practice replaced the understanding of the criminal leniency system;on the other hand,its application boundary with criminal simplified procedure is unclear and the rules are unknown.The German criminal penalty orders have assumed a wide range of diversion functions in the criminal procedure.It uses the "written trial" mode to quickly deal with misdemeanour cases.It emphasizes the consistency of opinions of the prosecutor and the court,and the court must not change the prosecutor’s sentence proposal.As the heavier administrative violations in China are gradually considered to be crimes,it is necessary to learn from the useful experience of German criminal penalty orders.We can create a speedy mode of "written trial" for misdemeanour cases so that it can "legally" share the function of diversion in proceeding and help to distinguish between misdemeanour and felony cases in criminal law and establish a hierarchical defence system for the incumbent lawyer.
出处
《中外法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2020年第1期224-240,共17页
Peking University Law Journal
基金
司法部2018年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目“中美德刑事审前分流构造研究”（项目编号：18SFB3022）
2019年度国家社会科学基金“现代法治视野下侦查行为的起点问题和法律边界研究”（项目编号：19BFX079）的研究成果
关键词
刑事速裁程序
刑事处罚令
书面审理
程序分流
Fast-Track Criminal Trial Procedure
Penalty Orders
Trial by Written Form
Diversion in Proceeding
