From Disparity in Sentencing Towards Sentencing Equality: The German Experience

This article addresses movements in Germany towards greater uniformity in sentencing since the entry into force of the first federal criminal code in 1871, with a particular focus on developments since the second half of the twentieth century. The author reviews the empirical evidence for sentence disparity; addresses the limitations of the constitutional principle of equality as a means for overcoming sentencing disparity; identifies the causes of sentence disparity and tracks practical efforts made to overcome that disparity, specifically through the introduction of prosecutorial guidelines and judicial manuals for certain frequent types of offending. He also explains and critiques different theoretical models for increasing sentencing equality, and reviews the advantages and potential uses of sentencing information systems such as a judgment database created in Japan. The author then turns to the contribution made by the appellate courts to greater uniformity in sentencing and expresses the hope that recent trends towards intensified guidance for trial courts in appeals concerning tax offences will be extended to other types of offences as well.     

论量刑合法

量刑合法是罪刑法定原则在量刑上的要求和表现,意即量刑符合刑法规定,但这并不意味着只符合刑法分则的规定,而应是综合地符合刑法总则与分则的所有相关规定。就法定刑而言,量刑合法并不只是静态地符合法定刑的规定,而是还动态地符合法定刑的司法变型即处断刑、宣告刑、执行刑或免刑的要求。量刑合法与量刑合理并不是彼此分离的两个独立之物,而是同时实现和互为表里的有机统一体,其中,量刑合法以量刑合理为实质内容,并表现为形式合理与实质合理的有机统一。     

Sentencing Councils and Victims

This article explores the place victims have, and should have, in bodies that formulate sentencing guidelines, with particular reference to sentencing guidelines in England and Wales and the Sentencing Council's obligation under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to have regard to ‘the impact of sentencing decisions on victims of offences’ when devising guidelines. The issues are situated in political and penological contexts; the place of victims in sentencing commissions or advisory bodies in the USA, England and Australia is analysed and the meaning and significance of the Sentencing Council's obligation towards victims is considered, relating the specific obligation to broader issues concerning the place of victims within bodies that formulate sentencing guidelines. While incorporating victims within sentencing commissions might undermine commissions’ aims, it can play an important role in helping to boost public confidence in criminal justice, a touchstone for all western governments’ criminal justice policies.     

论罪刑均衡的司法模式

罪刑均衡原则作为刑法的一个重要基本原则,是支撑刑法学发展的一个重要指标。在具体的司法实践中,错综复杂的案情以及层出不穷的社会问题,为实现刑法的公平正义以及追求最为均衡的刑罚裁量,带来了不小困难。现代文明社会要求严格恪守罪刑法定原则,罪刑均衡更成为一个司法层面的问题。然而,司法的过程是复杂的,在司法的过程中,司法界精英们发挥了重要的引导和规范功能。通过对刑罚裁量过程中各种辩证关系的分析和论证,努力寻求一种适合我国国情的罪刑均衡的司法模式。因此,在刑罚裁量的过程中,既要实现公平与效率的平衡,又要从法益侵害及行为人特质二元的衡量标准出发,实现应罚性与需罚性的平衡。最后,以刑罚的效果和民众的接受度作为刑罚适当的重要衡量标准,将刑罚裁量的量刑法理学模式与量刑社会学模式有机结合起来,并建议引入量刑听证制度,从司法的层面积极实现罪刑的均衡。     

Sentencing Disparity and Sentencing Guidelines: the Case of China

Asian Journal of Criminology - This study investigates sentencing disparity under the sentencing guidelines in China. Drawing upon the firsthand data of 509 criminal cases from a county-level court...     

Asperger's disorder and the criminal law

Asperger's Disorder has the potential to be relevant to many aspects of the functioning of the criminal justice system. However, its mere presence does not excuse or justify all offending. The inquiry into its potential relevance to criminal offending and sentencing must be both contextual and informed by suitably qualified expert evidence. This column reviews court decisions in respect of offences of physical violence, sexual violence, arson, stalking/harassing and computer offences across a range of jurisdictions to evaluate how courts have latterly incorporated Asperger's Disorder into decisions about criminal responsibility and culpability.     

人身危险性在量刑中的思考

刑事古典学派认为惩罚犯罪就是惩罚犯罪行为,所以提出在量刑中主要考虑的是社会危害性的大小;而刑事人类学派和刑事社会学派注重对犯罪分子个体的研究,从犯罪个体中去研究惩罚的力度,在量刑的时候着重考察犯罪分子的人身危险性的大小.两者的争论由来已久,在中国的刑法理论界就是主要采取了刑事古典学派的观点,认为惩罚力度大小应该与罪行的大小相适应,造成的社会危害程度决定刑罚的轻重.那么对于犯罪分子的人身危险性在量刑时的作用究竟应该有多大呢?试从实践入手,针对我国现行法律的规定来阐述一下人身危险性在量刑中的作用,从而完善我国刑法的量刑原则.     

International criminal justice: reflections on the past and the future

While Nuremberg constitutes a watershed in the evolution of international law with its establishment of the fundamental principle of individual criminal responsibility under international law it has not left much else by way of precedent for the subsequent international criminal tribunals. The adoption of UN Security Council Resolution 827 establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and Resolution 955 (1994) establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, set the groundwork for a new model of hybrid tribunals, with the establishment of the Special Court for Sierra Leone in 2002, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia in 2006, and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon in 2007. Perhaps one of the greatest legacies of these ad hoc and hybrid courts and tribunals has been paving the way for the establishment of a permanent international criminal court. However, they have also brought about the development of international criminal law through judicial interpretation, elaborating, inter alia, the elements of the crime of genocide as detailed in the 1948 Genocide Convention, the judicial recognition of the concept of joint criminal enterprise and the principle that national arrangements for amnesties in respect of international crimes are no bar to prosecution for such crimes at an international tribunal. In view of the completion strategies of the ad hoc Tribunals, as well as of the SCSL, this article delves into some of their legacies and outlines some of the difficulties and challenges they have faced, while identifying areas of best practice in order for the newly‐operational International Criminal Court to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past or even reinventing new wheels.     

论“认罪态度”在量刑情节中的定位

传统刑法和司法实践将"认罪态度"定位于酌定量刑情节,由于立法的模糊性和司法人员的认识差异,造成了量刑时空上的不平衡。本文认为,随着"自首"、"立功"和"坦白"的逐步法定化,将"积极退赃"和"赔偿损失"升格为法定量刑情节的条件已经具备。它不仅没有违背罪刑法定原则,而且依赖于刑罚改造理论和人身危险性理论的理论支撑,还有相关法律和司法解释作为法律基础及外国立法提供的参考和借鉴。因此,应将"积极退赃"和"赔偿损失"升格为法定量刑情节的条件和从宽处罚的具体标准,实现"认罪态度"在量刑情节中法律地位的转变及司法的公平与公正。     

论量刑精确制导

我国《刑法》第5条既是刑法的基本原则,也是量刑公正的一般标准,它要求量刑精确制导,最大限度地避免刑罚误差。实现量刑精确制导的根本出路是理论创新和方法创新,这主要表现在三个方面:(1)依法构建量刑标尺,将法定刑空间划分为200个刻度,把其中各种刑罚折算或者虚拟为有期徒刑的月数,明确1个刻度所体现的不同性质刑罚的度量,用以计算刑罚的轻重程度;(2)在正确定罪并找准法定刑的前提下,理性评价犯罪人具有的量刑情节,将其所反映的社会危害程度和人身危险程度用一定数值(积分)表示,借以计算行为人罪责的大小程度;(3)将量刑情节的轻重积分与量刑空间的轻重刻度按"1∶1"的标准相对应,前者在相应量刑空间中的读数,便是量刑公正的最佳适度。     

The Best Interests of the Child and the Sentencing of Offenders with Parental Responsibilities

There is a growing body of empirical research demonstrating that sentencing and other criminal justice decisions often have a detrimental, even traumatic impact upon an offender’s dependent children. Judges must balance numerous factors when making sentencing decisions, generally encompassing the protection of the public, the seriousness of the offence, and the personal circumstances of the offender. Should the probable impact of a sentence on an offender’s dependents be a significant factor to be weighed with these other factors in the process of sentencing? More specifically, when a court is sentencing an offender with parental responsibilities, does it have a duty to inquire about the potential impact of the sanction on the offender’s dependent child or children? Must it consider the principle of the best interests of the child or a child’s right to family life as a separate legal consideration in constructing a sentence? International human rights standards suggest that it does. After reviewing existing evidence on the potential hardship of sentencing decisions for an offender’s dependent children, the authors examine the experience of six countries in interpreting and applying these standards in their domestic laws, policies, and practices. They discuss some options for sentencing reforms in the broader context of efforts to reduce high rates of imprisonment in many countries and the need to address the differential impacts of criminal sanctions for primary caregivers and their children.     

Revising Images of Public Punitiveness: Sentencing by Lay and Professional English Magistrates

England grants unusually broad responsibility for sentencing of criminal offenders to voluntary part-time lay magistrates who, like their legally trained professional colleagues, sentence a wide range of offenders. Using simulated cases, archival analyses, and observational techniques, this article compares the sentencing decisions of the lay and professional magistrates in London. The study reveals no evidence of the lay preference for more severe sentencing that is typically shown in public opinion polls. The extent to which legal training, court experience, panel decisionmaking and role within the court system can explain the relative leniency of the lay magistrates are considered Consistent with results from other studies, these findings suggests that when laypersons assign sentences to particular offenders rather than express generalized satisfaction or dissatisfaction with current sentencing practices, laypersons are no more punitive than professional judges.     

量刑与定罪互动论:为了量刑公正可变换罪名

现行刑法理论中定罪与量刑的关系被扭曲了,刑法理论把准确定罪置于至高无上的地位,司法机关把大量精力耗费于准确判断罪名,定罪决定量刑、量刑不可能影响罪名成为刑法公理。但是,判断罪名意义上的定罪,并非刑法的目的;对被告人和社会最有意义的是量刑,判断罪名只是为公正量刑服务的;因此,如果常规判断的罪名会使量刑失当,就可以为了公正量刑而适度变换罪名。     

辩护律师的量刑建议权初探

刑事司法审判中量刑之轻重不仅直接事关被告人的切身利益,而且关乎到能否真正落实罪刑法定原则和罪责刑相适应原则,关系到法律的统一。在当前因刑法法定刑规定幅度较大而致实践中法官量刑畸轻畸重的情况下,赋予维护被告人合法权益的辩护律师以量刑建议权,充分发挥辩护律师的作用,对促进被告人的公正量刑,不仅是必要的,而且也是可行的。     

浅析我国死刑量刑体系中经济赔偿的合理性与局限性

按照我国《刑法》的规定,刑罚的本质是基于刑事责任对被告人予以惩罚报应,同时,刑罚的目的在于通过减少被告人的再犯可能性实现预防犯罪。同样,作为实现刑罚过程的量刑也应在这种"本质"和"目的"的体系中进行。人民法院在对死刑案件进行量刑时决定是否将加害方及其家属等积极进行经济赔偿的行为作为酌定情节予以考虑时,也应该首先从量刑的这种"本质"和"目的"的体系出发来判断。具体地讲,经济赔偿只有与案件的"犯罪事实"有着内在关联性,本来属于案件"定罪量刑"的要素时,并且,只有将其置于整个量刑体系下,在与其他众多的量刑要素的相互关系中被认定确实具有直接影响被告人的过去罪责(刑事责任)及其将来预防(再犯可能性)的意义时,才可以作为死刑量刑的酌定情节予以考虑,才可以成为慎用死刑立即执行而选择死刑缓期两年执行的理由。     

The Case for a Rational Reconstruction of Consent in Criminal Law

This article argues for consistency in criminal law and the need for 'rational reconstruction' of the law where necessary to achieve this. It focuses Parliament's failure to respect the need for consistency by passing a statutory definition of consent in the Sexual Offences Act 2003 which appears to apply only to sexual offences. As a result, the law on consent risks being a patchwork of statute and ad hoc case law, without any overarching principle to deal with new situations and different offences. The consequent lack of certainty, accessibility, predictability and fairness is compared to the standards of the European Convention on Human Rights. The statutory definition of consent in the context of the sexual offences is assessed critically as a model which could be used in offences against the person and property offences. The article concludes that until Parliament responds to the need for certainty and consistency by legislating on consent, there can be no rational reconstruction of consent under the Sexual Offences Act 2003.     

量刑制度宏观问题研究

量刑制度的外观为刑罚裁量与体系化构成 ,包括缓刑制度、死刑缓期执行、再犯和特别减轻制度 ;量刑制度具有规范、限制、整合、贯彻功能 ;运行量刑制度需要考虑运行环境和权力介入、媒体舆论、法官好恶、治安形势等相关影响因素 ;量刑制度存在两个基本走向 ,即综合化与精确化。量刑制度改革宜从总体目标、制度完善并结合刑事诉讼改革三方面同步进行     

Structuring Judicial Discretion in China: Exploring the 2014 Sentencing Guidelines

In recent years, a range of western jurisdictions has introduced reforms designed to restrict and guide judicial discretion at sentencing. The reforms enacted include mandatory sentencing laws and guiding statutes prescribing sentencing purposes and principles as well as important aggravating and mitigating factors. However, formal guidelines are the most promising and well-studied innovation. We may now add China to the growing list of countries that have recognized the utility of guidelines. Over the past decade, China has slowly developed sentencing guidelines for its courts. The new guidelines contain both general directions with respect to the determination of sentence as well as specific numerical guidelines for common offences. The guidelines do not follow the approach taken by the US schemes, many of which employ a two-dimensional sentencing grid. Instead, China has adopted a strategy consisting of “Starting Point” sentences which are then adjusted by the court to reflect relevant mitigating and aggravating factors. This approach is much closer to the guidelines developed in England and Wales and those proposed but not yet implemented in New Zealand and Israel. In this article, we explore the new Chinese guidelines and provide a limited comparative analysis with guidelines in other jurisdictions. England and Wales is selected as the principal comparator since it has developed and implemented a comprehensive system consisting of both offence-specified guidelines as well as generic guidelines.     

冲突量刑情节适用原则的反思

刑事个案中多个量刑情节冲突为常见事态。《最高人民法院关于常见犯罪的量刑指导意见》试图通过量化的量刑范式为司法实践提供指引,如此做法的合理性值得商榷。在责任主义的视野之下,有效区分预防刑情节和报应刑情节在个案中的作用与影响,坚持罪刑均衡原则、一般与特殊相统一原则及基本公正原则是解决量刑情节冲突的可行之路。     

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。