对未成年被告人适用财产刑的再思考

对未成年被告人适用财产刑的再思考□陈建明修订后的刑法在对被告人适用没收财产刑和罚金刑方面较之原刑法有了较大的变化，一些原来不需要判处没收财产和罚金的犯罪现在都对其科以上述刑罚，尤其是财产型的犯罪。这种变化对未成年被告人而言，影响是很大的。未成年被告人...     

论财产刑执行的理论基础——基于民法和民事诉讼法的分析

财产刑执行是由人民法院代表国家对被告人责任财产的执行,财产刑执行适用民事执行的原则表明,财产刑执行与民事执行的共性与个性,都必须从民法和民事诉讼法学理论中寻求答案.具体而言,财产刑执行应当遵循公法上的债权理论、被告人的责任财产理论等基础理论.     

关于财产刑执行的几个问题

财产刑执行问题长期困扰着我国司法界,财产刑的判处和执行随意性很大,其原因在于财产刑执行缺乏明确的法律规定,判罚标准不尽合理,以及公安司法机关配合不力。对此,文章有针对性地提出设置财产刑诉辩程序以及完善财产刑执行的立法机制等对策,以期改变财产刑执结率低的现状。     

未成年被告人人身危险性的评估研究——以未成年人社会调查报告的模糊综合评价为视角

未成年人社会调查报告是未成年被告人人身危险性的重要表征,也是审理未成年人刑事案件的重要参考依据。但是由于未成年人社会调查报告本身、法官认定未成年人社会调查报告的心证以及未成年人社会调查报告与人身危险性的相关度等方面存在着模糊性,因此,有必要运用模糊理论综合评价未成年人社会调查报告,以期准确认定未成年被告人的人身危险性的大小。     

谈经济犯罪财产刑的适用

我国刑法规定的财产刑有两种,即罚金和没收财产。正确适用财产刑,是人民法院同一切经济犯罪分子作斗争的重要刑罚手段,它可以堵塞被告人有赃不退待出狱后再享受,或犯了罪退了赃即可得到从轻处罚的侥幸心理。但在当前审判实践中,适用财产刑却往往被束之高阁或是为数极少,究其原因,除习惯于以追缴退赔取代财产刑的适用外,主要是适用财产刑难度大,特别是对适用范围、条件、标准,目前立法和司法解释均无具体规定,各地审判实践的做法也不统一。为使财产刑在与经济犯罪活动作斗争中发挥其应有的作用,笔者就近年在审判实践中所遇到的有关适用财产刑方面的几个问题进行剖析。 适用没收财产刑的几个问题 对拒不退赃的被告人适用财产刑问题。对经济犯     

社会调查制度在未成年人刑事案件中的全程构建

目前,社会调查报告主要局限于审查起诉和审判阶段,内容也仅限于未成年被告人在社区的表现情况、学校或单位的学习、工作情况及家庭生活情况等,对调查报告的适用规则、流程等也未有明确规定.建议将未成年犯罪嫌疑人的社会调查工作前移至案件的侦查阶段,并在立法层面明确社会调查报告的具体运用规则.     

未成年人刑事案件社会调查制度的困境及出路

未成年人刑事案件社会调查制度是指在未成年人刑事案件诉讼过程中,由专职机构或者专职人员对未成年被告人的成长经历、性格特点、家庭环境、学习情况、心智状况以及案发后表现等情况进行全面、细致的调查,并出具书面的调查报告,为司法机关公正合理地惩罚、教育、挽救未成年被告人提供参考     

论没收财产刑的改革与完善——以绵阳市最近三年司法统计数据为例

绵阳市中级人民法院2007-2009年审理的一审案件和二审案件的司法统计数据表明:没收财产刑配置于重罪,司法适用率也比较高;轻罪则很少适用没收财产刑.而较多地适用罚金刑;没收部分财产的比例高于没收全部财产的比例,主要集中的罪名在职务犯罪和毒品犯罪.没收财产刑有其自身独特的优势,简单地以罚金刑的优势和"私权神圣"的意识形态来否定没收财产刑是不可取的.应当通过建立刑事被告人财产申报制度、明确没收部分财产数额的标准、建立刑事执行庭统一负责执行没收财产刑和特别没收、完善民事债权优先制度来改革与完善没收财产刑.     

未成年人社会调查报告制作刍议

2012年修订通过的《刑事诉讼法》,对未成年犯罪人的相关情况进行调查这一问题首次以刑事立法的形式专门予以规定。但是,由于法律规定不够详细、具体,在实际操作中,调查内容的不规范、形式的不统一,造成了司法机关适用调查报告的随意性,不利于对未成年犯罪嫌疑人(被告人)的教育挽救,因此,规范调查报告的制作十分必要。     

浅谈财产刑执行难及对策

财产刑作为刑罚手段之一,是我国刑罚体系的重要内容之一,其能否得到有效执行是国家实现刑罚权的重要体现。而司法实践中,财产刑执行现状不容乐观,大量财产刑得不到有效执行。这种现象严重影响到法院生效裁判的严肃性和权威性,不可避免地使财产刑的判决流于形式,有违财产刑的立法初衷。本文从财产刑适用空间、裁判依据、执行程序等方面分析财产刑的执行现状以,从立法、司法、社会等分析原因,并提出解决对策。     

Revisiting the Role of Negotiation and Trivialization in Environmental Law Enforcement

Using an empirical assessment of the use of enforcement undertakings by the Environment Agency and the engagement of the courts with the recently enacted sentencing guidelines for environmental offences, this article argues that the enforcement of environmental law is undergoing significant change. This change manifests itself in an increased reliance on written negotiated agreements in the form of enforcement undertakings by the Enivironment Agency and the willingness of the courts to hand down significant fines in cases against certain types of polluters. These new dynamics suggest that negotiation continues to play an important role in the enforcement of environmental law, albeit in a contractualized form. The application of the sentencing guidelines conversely suggests that environmental offences are no longer trivialized by the courts. Taken together, these emerging dynamics not only create specific incentives between agencies and offenders but also call into question established understandings and perceptions of regulatory enforcement.     

Wildlife Crime: The Problems of Enforcement

Environmental and wildlife crime appear recently to be benefitting from an increasing profile amongst those agencies tasked with their control, as well as receiving growing criminological attention. Despite this, those with responsibilities in this area report that it remains marginalised, receiving limited resources and suffering from a lack of political impetus to push such problems higher up the agenda. This is particularly so for those agencies, such as the police, that may be seen to have many more pressing objectives. This discussion paper considers the problems of relying on an enforcement approach to controlling such offences, taking, as an example, those activities that may be termed ‘wildlife crime’, focusing on the situation in England and Wales. Firstly, the legislative framework that criminalises harm or exploitation of wildlife is presented, alongside the main enforcement methods used. Next, the problems facing an enforcement approach are critically considered, the key issues being: under-resourcing and marginalisation, the large ‘dark-figure’ of wildlife crime, the possibility of corruption, the lack of seriousness with which such crimes are viewed, and the lack of deterrent effect. Finally, responses to the problems of enforcement are presented, categorised as either methods to improve enforcement or, as the author advocates, methods which are alternatives to enforcement (such as adopting a crime prevention approach). The paper concludes with suggestions for future research in this field.     

量刑建议制度探析——以重庆市A区检察院量刑建议工作为调查分析样本

量刑建议制度在试行过程中逐渐暴露出定罪建议权限设置低于量刑建议权、量刑建议随起诉书移送导致出现因量刑理由变化影响量刑的准确性、量刑建议在庭审中提出的阶段缺乏统一规定等制度设计上的缺陷,以及面临量刑建议与法院判决存在一定偏差、量刑建议是否被采纳受法院内部标准和刑事政策变化的影响大、法院就低采纳量刑建议、量刑建议未完全纳入判决书等制度运行中的弊端。应当建立量刑建议听取辩护人和被害人意见的制度,取消量刑建议讨论程序,实行庭前证据开示,赋予公诉人在法庭上改变或者撤回量刑建议权,将量刑建议采纳情况作为抗诉依据,设置科学合理的量刑建议考核标准。     

执行体制的统一化构建——以解决民事“执行难”为出发点

“执行难”的成因是多方面的,但最深刻的原因无疑存在于执行体制本身。我国目前的执行体制中,刑事执行、民事执行和行政执行既各自为政,又相互交叉,不仅在执行机构上显得臃肿和凌乱,尤其难以做到执行资源的优化配置和互补整合,不利于国家执行权的统一化行使。对民事执行而言,行使审判权的法院兼顾行使执行权不仅具有理论上的障碍,尤其在实践中已被雄辩地证明是行不通的。因此,将执行权从法院权力结构中分离出去交由统一的执行机构行使,是化解“执行难”的最佳选择。     

量刑建议制度:现实与未来——一个实证角度的研究

检察官量刑建议制度是制约法官量刑自由裁量权的重要方式,也是确保量刑公正的重要手段。通过对某基层检察院量刑建议施行情况调研资料的分析可以看出:实务界对量刑建议采纳率存在误读、程序设置背离诉讼效率、辩护权并未加强、量刑建议中的刑期计算存在不合理性和不规范性等一系列问题。应以公正和效率两大诉讼价值为主线,寻求解决我国检察官量刑建议实务困境之路径。     

Prevention of sexual violence by those who have been sexually violent

This article argues that indeterminate sentencing is the optimal means of preventing recidivism among sex offenders, both as an instrumental matter and jurisprudentially. Once a person is convicted of an offense, the duration and nature of sentence should be based on a back-end decision made by experts in recidivism reduction, within broad ranges set by the legislature. This position is defended against a number of objections, including claims that such a system relies on flawed risk assessments, ignores societal views of justice, denigrates offenders and victims, undermines deterrence and norm enforcement, depends too heavily on costly, uneven and demoralizing risk management schemes, and, as a result of one or more of these objections, is unconstitutional.     

Restorative Justice,Consistency and Proportionality: Examining the Trade-off

Abstract

Restorative justice conferences that operate as sentencing mechanisms involve the making of a trade-off between empowering lay participants to make their own decisions, and the requirements of consistency and proportionality, which are established principles of sentencing. In current restorative justice practice, this trade-off tends to be made more in favour of consistency and proportionality, at the expense of the empowerment of lay participants.

Empowerment is central to key benefits of restorative justice, such as reducing recidivism and increasing victim satisfaction. However, its importance to the effectiveness of restorative justice is not always properly acknowledged. In addition to this lack of acknowledgment, there are both conceptual and practical problems with the principles of consistency and proportionality (particularly in the way that they are presented when considered in relation to restorative justice) that are often overlooked. As a result, the tendency is for assumptions to be made about the necessary supremacy of these principles over empowerment. This paper urges more acknowledgement of the importance of empowerment in restorative justice, together with a greater appreciation of the problems with consistency and proportionality, with a view to challenging assumptions about the way that the trade-off must be made.     

Policing Public Drugs Nuisance Through The Anti-Social Behaviour Legislation: Questions and Contradictions

This paper reports findings from a London-based study and provides evidence of rigorous law enforcement activity being enacted in drives to alleviate local areas of public drugs nuisance, namely the use of anti-social behaviour orders (ASBOs) and dispersal and banning orders, as well as the closure of 'crack houses'. The paper acknowledges these legislative tools were necessary to deal with the real life problems of visible drugs nuisance that had grown up in some communities, but it draws attention to the way these policing responses put already vulnerable, ill and highly disadvantaged drugs users at greater risk of marginalisation than they already experienced. Plus, the punitive reach of banning orders in the form of ASBOs and street-level policing which centres on minor drugs crimes enhances the criminalisation of low-level drugs offenders and heightened the likelihood of imprisonment. The author suggests a tension exists between community policing and the removal of visible public drug nuisance through pro-arrest strategies, and the wider government drugs policy which encourages multi-agency working to channel problem drugs users into appropriate treatment settings to assist in tackling drugs crime lifestyles.     

Chapter 7: Drafting the Custody Order

This chapter outlines provisions that should be included in custody orders to aid interstate enforcement. When there is risk of child abduction, the court should include preventive measures in the custody order. This chapter also helps judges identify families at risk for child abduction, and suggests appropriate safeguards to put in the order.     

Sentencing rationales, judicial discretion, and the practice of criminal fines in Israel

Much attention has been paid over the last three decades to the examination of the criminal fine, its administration, enforcement policies, and effectiveness. Yet, one research topic has often been overlooked: the link between sentencing rationales, judiciary discretion, and fining policy. The present research, based upon ninety hours of phenomenological semi-structured interviews undertaken in a random sample of forty active Israeli magistrates, six hundred verdicts, and quantitative data regarding the fining policy in Israel, analyzed the degree of harmony/disparity between these variables. The main findings revealed lack of confidence in the ability of the criminal fine to successfully achieve different penal objectives, scarcity of knowledge of actual fining administration procedures, and a high degree of harmony between fining rationales and ideology.