刑事诉讼法律观的嬗变——俄罗斯新刑事诉讼法评析

俄罗斯联邦新刑事诉讼法典中有关辩论式诉讼模式的确立 ,证据规则的发展 ,犯罪嫌疑人、被告人辩护权保障机制的完善 ,检察机关在刑事诉讼中的职能转换以及被告人认罪的特别审理程序等项内容 ,构成俄罗斯刑事诉讼法的新亮点。尤其对被告人诉讼权利和自由保障的优先性考虑 ,对程序公正与诉讼效率的双向追求 ,成为支撑新法典的全新价值理念 ,也是对一些守旧的传统法律观念的否定     

The right to counsel in Iranian criminal justice system

Criminal law deals with very important aspects of the life in the society. The subjects of the crime, health, reputation … are so important that endangering them requires punishment and it is told that the society in order to protect the public order should punish the perpetrators. There is no doubt that the criminals should be punished. The punishment enacted by the legislator should be proportional. The more serious the crime, the more severe the punishment. But, it seems that in the process of criminal trial, the accused has rights too. It means that society has not an absolute authority in accusation and punishment and in addition to the proportionality and justification of punishment the trial should be fair. In other words, it is not possible to speak about justice any more if the criminal is punished proportionally and rightly but not fairly, i.e. without allowing him/her to present his/her case, defend him/herself and obtain legal aid or sufficient information. Iranian criminal law, like other criminal justice systems in respecting the rights of the accused, has provided the right to counsel. This value can be expressed in the concept of the rule of law, recognized in international documents. It seems that the standards of the criminal procedure are mostly determined and developed under the influence of this concept. The current paper considers different aspects of the right to counsel in Iran.     

论我国刑事缺席审判制度的构建——以《联合国反腐败公约》资产追回机制为切入点

刑事缺席审判制度,在表面上有违直接辩护和参与原则,有侵犯被告人诉讼权益之嫌.但依据《公约》规定的精神,针对腐败案件而设立的刑事缺席审判制度,其关注的重点并非如何将被告人绳之以法,而是如何快速有效地追回腐败犯罪所涉及到的资产,它将被告人的诉讼参与权与被害人的财产赔偿权放在一个天平上衡量,这不同于传统司法理念那样将国家的追诉权与被告人的诉讼权对立.故只要按科学的制度实施,就同样可以做到打击犯罪与守护正义的平衡.     

Beyond normative constraints: Declining institutionalism and the emergence of substantive and procedural justice

Popular notions of what it means to be put on trial invariably generate thoughts of the adversarial criminal trial, most often before a judge and jury. However, the criminal trial as the site for the testing of evidence of wrongdoing via a model of proof that proceeds according to prescribed processes in a normative institutional milieu is in decline. Controversially, this decline has been met with resistance from the legal profession, academics, policy makers and other stakeholders seeking to preserve the due process model that defines the criminal trial as an adversarial exchange between state and defendant. While the due process model continues to dominate as popular conceptualisation, the twenty-first century criminal trial has changed to such an extent that it is no longer seen as the quintessential form for the meting out of procedural fairness and testing of state's evidence, that emerged toward the end of the seventeenth century. Rather, the rise of control orders, modifications to the law of evidence, and the right of the accused to confront their accuser, together with the inclusion of non-traditional agents of justice, specifically victims and the community, has brought forward an era of substantive and procedural justice that lies beyond the normative constraints of the criminal trial. Robed counsel and bewigged judges beware; the advent of substantive and procedural justice has allowed for greater innovation transgressing the orthodoxies of criminal law in common law systems of justice. This paper will consider the virtues of the introduction of a transgressive criminal procedure.     

无罪推定原则的确立与口供制度的完善

无罪推定是被追诉者的一项基本权利,也是被追诉者各项诉讼权利的基础。在刑事诉讼中将无罪推定确立为指导刑事诉讼活动的基本准则,就是无罪推定原则。我国应当在刑事诉讼中彻底确立无罪推定原则。无罪推定及其引申的主要内容应当分为三个层次:证明责任、被追诉者的权利和对被追诉者的权利的保障。由于无罪推定假定被追诉者无罪,对控诉的举证责任应由控方承担,被追诉者不承担无罪的举证责任,所以,被追诉者就没有理由配合控方提供自己犯罪的证据,包括口供。我国刑事诉讼法关于"犯罪嫌疑人对侦查人员的提问,应当如实回答"的规定,违背了无罪推定关于被追诉者不应当承担举证或证明责任的基本精神,使得被追诉者负有帮助侦控方履行举证和证明的义务。这一规定实质上表明我国刑诉法要求被追诉者承担举证或证明责任。因此,从无罪推定的这一层面上说"应当如实回答"是不合理的,应当予以取消。     

刑事被告人权利的宪法化问题

中国刑事司法改革的一个重大课题是将被告人的重要诉讼权利上升为宪法性权利 ,并在刑事诉讼程序建构中尊重和实现这些权利 ,在司法体系中建立一种针对宪法性侵权行为的权利救济机制。然而 ,在被告人权利宪法化问题上 ,我国的刑事诉讼法还存在着不少亟待解决的重大课题。只有在被告人权利宪法化方面取得实质性的突破和进展 ,刑事诉讼法对于犯罪嫌疑人、被告人权利的保护 ,以及未来以加强这种权利保护为标志的法律改革 ,才有其坚实的法律基础     

Beyond autonomy: repositioning the right to self-representation within the value of fair trial in criminal proceedings in Ghana

This article examines the legal framework for the grant and exercise of the right to self-representation in criminal proceedings in Ghana, using a doctrinal research approach. It finds that the exaltation of the value of autonomy of the right above considerations of procedural equality and trial fairness affects the integrity of the trial process. More importantly, the legal system in Ghana provides little or no standards setting the modalities of the exercise or revocation of the right. This article recommends a departure from the general standard of proceeding pro se which pays no regard to the competency of the accused person in favour of an adoption of a competency-based approach in order to guarantee an effective exercise of the right to self-representation. It also suggests the formulation and adoption of efficient standards in line with international law for the purpose of delimiting the scope of revocation of the right in criminal proceedings.     

Development of Russia's Criminal Justice System: Vectors,Reform Measures,and Major Players

This report presents basic quantitative analysis of legislative changes in the Russian criminal justice system between 2014 and 2016. While changes in criminal law tended to introduce harsher criminal punishments, changes in criminal procedure enhanced procedural guarantees of the rights of suspects, the accused, persons on trial, and victims.     

论公诉变更

公诉变更制度的设置,影响审判的公正、效率以及被告人合法权益的实现,但目前的刑事诉讼对此只有司法解释而无诉讼法规范。修改刑事诉讼法,应当设置这种规范。我国公诉变更权由检察机关享有,公诉的追加与内容的变更不得妨碍诉讼的正常进行与诉讼效率,同时应当保障被告人的辩护权,还应作出适当的审理时限规定。撤回起诉不得妨碍被告人获得公正审判的权利,并应明确撤回起诉具有不起诉的效力。     

美国刑事无效辩护制度及其对我国的借鉴

美国不仅有世界上最严密的刑事诉讼规则,还有非常完备的辩护律师制度。其中,刑事诉讼中的无效辩护规则是被告人获得律师帮助最有力的救济措施。美国最高法院确立的无效辩护标准包括形式标准和实质标准。基于提高刑事辩护的质量,确保刑事被指控人的辩护权的真正实现,我国应当借鉴美国的无效辩护制度,从立法和司法上进一步完善刑事诉讼法律制度、律师刑事辩护规则和律师职业伦理规则等。     

The Right to an Impartial Hearing Trumps the Social Imperative of Bringing Accused to Trial Even ‘Down Under’

Accused persons who are subjected to a saturation level of negative media coverage may be denied an impartial hearing, which is perhaps the most important aspect of the right to a fair hearing. Despite this, the courts have generally held that the social imperative of prosecuting accused trumps the interests of the accused. The justification for an impartial hearing stems from the repugnance of convicting the innocent. Viewed dispassionately, this imperative is not absolute, given that every legal system condones procedures which result in the conviction of some innocent people. While the importance of guarding against wrongful convictions has been overstated, the imperative to bring to trial all accused has been even more exaggerated. The legal system has displayed a capacity to deal with cases where the guilty walk free. The institutional integrity of the criminal justice system would be significantly compromised by convictions that are tarnished by pre-judgment. Confidence in the criminal justice system is more important than individual criminal accountability. The inability to receive an impartial hearing should result in a permanent stay. The only exception is where the alleged crime has the capacity to cause widespread fear or social unrest. This only applies in relation to serious acts of terrorism. This article focuses on recent legal fair trial developments in Australia, however, the analysis, reasoning and conclusion applies in relation to all jurisdictions where juries determine guilt and innocence.     

宪政视角下的听证权初探

听证权是一种从宪法正当程序和其他基本权利中推导出的宪法性权利,是保障其他权利实现的权利,是人民实现当家作主的一种程序性权利。听证权的制度化建立在主权在民的深厚法理基础之上,集中体现了控制国家权力和保障人权的宪政理念,它能够加快民主决策、民主管理和民主监督的宪政化步伐,对实现社会正义、形成宪政秩序具有极其重要的作用,因而是宪法实施的重要制度机制。     

对我国刑事审判中法官和当事人地位的反思

法官和当事人在刑事审判中的地位是划分不同的刑事审判模式的关键性因素。当事人在刑事审判中具有较高的诉讼地位是保护当事人合法权益的重要前提。为了进一步保护当事人的合法权益,必须规范法官在审判中的行为,并提高刑事诉讼的当事人在我国的刑事审判中的诉讼地位。     

刑事一审裁判质量保证体系论纲

一审程序是审判程序的核心。刑事一审裁判质量的高下,事关诉讼公正与诉讼效率。公诉案件的一审裁判是在侦查、起诉、辩护、审判各方的共同作用下形成的。任何一方职能萎缩或者得不到充分发挥,一审裁判质量就没有保证。要保证刑事一审裁判的质量,就必须保证侦查、起诉的质量,落实有效辩护,保证合议庭、独任庭正确认定事实和适用法律。     

论程序正义视域下的中国刑辩律师困境

律师职业自产生之初就与正当程序有着紧密联系,正是程序正义赋予了律师职业以内在的价值追求.但现今的中国刑事辩护律师却处境尴尬：他们参与刑事辩护率低迷;在刑事诉讼中的各项权利难以保障;有时深受社会公众与媒体舆论的怀疑、攻讦,甚至有可能面临牢狱之灾.一系列问题表明,刑事辩护作为司法程序中的重要环节,正日益失去其维护司法公正的的意义和作用.因此,要突破律师现今面临的种种困境,必须在现念上和制度上进一步落实程序正义.     

When Both Sides are Mistaken: Layperson and Legal Professionals’ Misconceptions of Canadian Suspects’ Legal Rights Upon Arrest

Canadian criminal suspects have notably limited access to legal counsel upon arrest compared to suspects in the U.S. Additionally, prior research has shown significant misunderstanding of police warnings informing suspects of their rights upon arrest. This paper presents three studies on Canadians’ comprehension of criminal suspects’ rights upon arrest, with a focus on the right to counsel. Study 1 (N=80) and Study 2 (N=377) examined Canadian layperson’s comprehension, knowledge, and perceptions of legal rights upon arrest. In turn, Study 3 (N=78) investigated Canadian legal professionals’ perceptions of laypersons’ knowledge of those rights. Results from these three studies indicated there is substantial confusion about the right to counsel for Canadian criminal suspects. These results also support previous research demonstrating problems with comprehension of Canadian police cautions. Taken together, the findings of the present research pose significant concern for an increased risk of false confessions from Canadian suspects who enter an interrogation with limited knowledge and understanding of their legal right to counsel.     

侦查程序中律师帮助权若干问题研究

侦查程序中 ,犯罪嫌疑人的人权最容易被忽视。就我国的司法实践而言 ,起诉和审判在很大程度上依赖侦查的结果 ,侦查程序是真正决定犯罪嫌疑人、被告人命运的关键程序。我国刑事诉讼法在增加庭审抗辩色彩的同时 ,却没有相应地增加侦查程序中的对抗因素 ,犯罪嫌疑人在侦查程序中的律师帮助权与其他国家相比尚存在亟待改进之处。     

中国特色刑事诉讼制度的重大发展

刑事诉讼法修改在坚持从我国基本国情出发,循序渐进地推进我国刑事诉讼制度的完善;坚持统筹处理好惩罚犯罪与保障人权的关系;坚持着力解决在惩治犯罪与维护司法公正方面存在的突出问题原则下,贯彻了"尊重和保障人权"的宪法原则,对证据制度、辩护制度、强制措施、侦查程序、审判程序、执行程序等方面作了完善,是中国特色刑事诉讼制度的重大发展。但在取得很大成绩的同时,问题与不足也是客观存在的,还需要进一步完善,并通过司法解释的出台和实施细则的制定加以弥补。     

Constitutional protection of confessions made by mentally retarded defendants

Criminal confessions made in response to custodial questioning are excluded from evidence unless a defendant voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently waived his Miranda rights. In Connelly, the Supreme Court erred by holding that, absent explicit police coercion, a mentally ill individual's waiver is valid. The Court failed to consider the defendant's subjective impairments that might invalidate his waiver. By contrast, the Patterson Court suggested that a defendant's right to counsel may attach at an early stage in a criminal proceeding if the defendant has a significant need for counsel. This Note addresses the special needs of a mentally retarded person in the criminal justice system. The Note argues that mentally retarded suspects require careful explanation of Miranda rights in order to understand them. The intellectual and adaptive deficiencies which characterize mental retardation also necessitate an inquiry into a valid waiver that accounts for these disabilities. Furthermore, the special needs of the mentally retarded mandate that the right to counsel attach as early as the precustodial stage of an investigation. Early access to counsel most effectively assures that a mentally retarded person's waiver of constitutional rights is voluntary, knowing and intelligent.     

论犯罪控制视野中的刑事诉讼监督

犯罪控制并非程序正义的对立面,其目的之一即是对公民人权的保障。但是,犯罪控制的＂度＂把握不好就会有害于程序正义的实现。因此,有必要对犯罪控制进行＂度＂的控制,刑事诉讼监督即为方式之一,其关注点是人权与正义。新时期实施刑事诉讼监督,应坚持宽严相济刑事政策,吸取情境预防的经验,理顺法律监督内外部关系。