关于邀请参加2007年“正义论坛”并征集论文通知

为了深入学习领会党的十六届六中全会《关于建设社会主义和谐社会的决定》和认真落实最高人民检察院十二检和自治区检察院十五检会议精神，在检察工作中正确贯彻宽严相济刑事司法政策，为构建和谐社会服务。自治区检察院和自治区检察官协会将在今年下半年举办以“贯彻宽严相济刑事司法政策，促进和谐社会建设”为主题的“2007·正义论坛”。     

参加第十二届国际检察官联合会年会暨会员代表大会的几点感受

国际检察官联合会（International Association of Prosecutors，简称“IAP”）是目前世界上唯一的一个国际性检察官组织，是一个非政治性、非政府性的国际组织，由匈牙利、荷兰、奥地利等国的检察官联合会发起，于1995年6月在联合国维也纳总部组建。国际检察官联合会的宗旨是促进有效、公平、公正、有力地起诉刑事犯罪；贯彻实施国际社会普遍公认的、独立起诉犯罪所必须的刑事司法原则和标准；协助检察官在国际范围内打击有组织犯罪或其他严重犯罪活动，促进快速、有效的国际合作；扩大检察官的职业影响力，发挥检察官在刑事司法中至关重要的作用；加强检察官之间、检察机构之间业已建立的良好关系，为检察官之间、检察机构之间交流和传播信息、知识与经验提供便利等。国际检察官联合会现有团体会员120余个，个人会员20万余名。我国检察官协会以创始国之一的检察组织的身份加入国际检察官联合会，成为团体会员。经最高人民检察院推荐，我国现有27名高级检察官加入了国际检察官联合会，成为国际检察官联合会的个人会员。最高人民检察院国际合作局局长叶峰自2000年起一直担任国际检察官联合会副主席。     

两岸检察官法律地位之比较

检察官的法律地位，历来是检察制度中最具争议的话题之一，在检察官制诞生之初，即因此而引发法律界的广泛讨论，且绵延至今仍未有定论。检察官的法律地位，涉及三个相关问题：第一，检察官的法律身份究竞是司法官，还是行政官？第二，检察官与警察之间的关系，究竟是“将兵”关系，还是“伙伴”关系，此即检、警关系问题；第三，检察官与法官之间的关系即检、审关系问题。对此，海峡两岸检察官制度皆存在一定的模糊之处，由此延及检警关系、检法关系均存在一定差异。但是，某种程度上延续了大陆法系传统的两岸检察官在基本法律定位方面也存在共通之处，这就是作为法治国的“法律守护人”，发挥着“法律监督”即“国家权力双重控制”功能。     

检察官刑事强制处分权的分配

检察官刑事强制处分权是检察官为了获取证据或者控制被追诉人而具有的强制处分的权能,包括决定权、执行权.从检察官决定刑事强制处分的功能看,其具有法官的特点;从检察官执行强制处分的功能看,又具有警察的特点.检察官的强制处分权具有"混合型"权力的特征,因此,在对其进行分配时,这是一个重要的参考因素.此外,其他包括两大法系国家或地区的相关制度考察,法官中立性地位的保证,以及检察官举证责任的需要,等等,都是对检察官刑事强制处分权进行合理分配时应当考虑的因素.     

工作动态

协会工作动态 4月24日自治区检察官协会与自治区检察院联合向各盟市地区检察（分）院下发了《关于征集2007年“正义论坛”论文的通知》。根据自治区检察官协会第三届理事会第三次会议的工作安排，自治区检察院和自治区检察官协会举办的2007年“正义论坛”以“贯彻宽严相济刑事司法政策，促进和谐社会建设”为主题，论坛的举办是为了深入落实高检院十二检和自治区院十五检会议精神，     

国际检察官的独立性及其保障

国际刑事特设法庭,即前南国际刑事法庭、卢旺达国际刑事法庭以及常设性国际刑事法院,对检察官的独立性都作了明确规定。这不仅符合国内刑事司法制度中的共同原则,也是打击危害国际社会的最严重犯罪的必要保障。可以说,国际检察官的独立性是国际刑法体系的一个结构性保障。     

着力构建符合未成年人检察特点的一体化工作模式——访最高人民检察院未成年人检察工作办公室主任张志杰北大核心

最高人民检察院近日下发的《未成年人刑事检察工作指引（试行）》中规定,检察院未检部门实行捕、诉、监、防一体化工作模式,同一名检察官或者同一个检察官办案组负责同一刑事案件的审查逮捕、审查起诉、诉讼监督和犯罪预防等工作。为进一步厘清未成年人检察一体化工作模式的内涵,推动未成年人检察工作专业化、规范化、社会化建设,本刊组织专家和实务界人士对“未检一体化”进行专门研讨,敬请关注。     

对基层检察院实施“检警一体化”的思考

在检察机关内部,检察官和法警依法履行着不同的职能,但整体上说又难以截然分开。为了最大限度地发挥人力资源的作用,更好地使法警职能与检察职能密切配合,有必要积极探索检察机关内部的“检警一体化”运作机制。所谓“检警一体化”,主要是指在自侦案件的侦查过程中,在检察长或主办检察官的统一指挥下,司法警察与查办案件的检察官各司其职,又紧密配合,共同实现侦查计划、完成侦查任务的一种办案模式。一、实施“检警一体化”的必要性在一段时间,检察机关存在着“人人都是指挥官,个个都是侦查员”等检警不分、检警混岗、职责不明的情况。随着…     

证据披露——一个比较研究的话题

2005年2月,在“比较刑事司法国际研讨会”上,证据披露是其中一个重要题目。由于讨论的比较全面深入,我们写出来以飨读者。一、证据开示与阅卷在世界范围内,就刑事诉讼而言,控方需要将证据材料披露给辩方,但在具体的做法上,又分成两类:一类是进行证据开示;一类是辩方阅卷。在美国、加拿大等英美法国家,通常进行证据开示,即由检察官向辩方披露证据,至于何时披露,披露证据的范围等,则因国家和案件而异,后文详述。在另一些国家,则无标准的证据开示程序,辩方获得证据材料的方法是阅卷,到检察官处或法官处阅卷,时间有的在侦查结束后,检察官决定起…     

检察官自由裁量权探微

检察官自由裁量制度是现代刑事司法文明的产物,其蕴涵着深刻的现代刑事司法基本理念.但是,由于诸多因素的影响,致使我国检察官的自由裁量权与域外检察官的自由裁量权相比较仍然存在着较大的差距,主要包括适用条件过于严格、运用率极低、运用程序相当繁琐等问题.应当在分析域外检察官自由裁量权合理内核的基础上,以宽严相济刑事司法政策为指针,正确而有效地行使检察官自由裁量权.     

Well-informed? Well Represented? Well Nigh Powerless? Victims and Prosecutorial Decision-making

This article provides a brief overview of the ways in which prosecutors must engage with victims in the course of their work in criminal proceedings and what formal roles victims can assume in criminal proceedings. Besides exploring what rights victims have per se in criminal proceedings, analysis is provided as to what it means to be an additional prosecutor or a private prosecutor in several European criminal justice systems. A brief analysis of the effects these rights and the use of prosecutorial discretion has on victims is provided.     

Discretion at the Pre-Trial Stage: A Comparative Study

This study aims to explore the discretion of the police and prosecutors during the pre-trial stage based on six systems of criminal justice: England and Wales, the United States, France, Germany, Japan, and South Korea. In criminal proceedings, discretion plays a significant role in supplementing as statutes cannot provide for every circumstance. In particular, at the pre-trial stage, public prosecutors can conclude their cases by exercising considerable discretion. Such discretion differs depending on the jurisdiction. The differences demonstrate distinctive prosecutorial roles. Based upon these findings, I propose that in general, the public prosecution service plays a filtering role. Unlike other jurisdictions, in Korea the prosecutors act as monopolists. However, justice cannot be achieved by the monopoly of one legal actor in the criminal proceedings.     

Feminist Prosecutors and Patriarchal States

In Prosecuting Domestic Violence: A Philosophical Analysis, Michelle Madden Dempsey focuses on the dilemma prosecutors face when domestic violence victims are unwilling to cooperate in the criminal prosecution of their abusive partners. Starting from the premise that the ultimate goal should be putting an end to domestic violence, Dempsey urges prosecutors to act as feminists in deciding how to proceed in such cases. Doing so, Dempsey argues, will tend to make the character of the prosecutor’s community and state less patriarchal and thus help stamp out domestic violence. This article analyzes two issues arising from Dempsey’s work: first, whether prosecutors can justifiably be viewed as representatives of their states and communities; and, second, how prosecutors committed to using their discretion to battle both domestic violence and patriarchy would go about determining in a particular case whether to pursue criminal charges against the wishes of a victim.     

公诉裁量权视野下检察机关撤回起诉权探究

在现代刑事诉讼中,世界各国普遍赋予了检察机关一定的公诉裁量权。撤回起诉权是检察机关公诉裁量权的权能范畴。检察机关享有撤回起诉权不仅有其理论依据,而且为司法实践所需要。本文通过研究我国检察机关撤回起诉权的现状,提出了相关的立法建议。     

Tinker, Tailor, Policy-maker ... ... ... The Wider Context of Prosecution Service Work

This article explores the wider ambit of prosecutorial work outside classic criminal proceedings in 11 European criminal justice systems. It provides an overview of the roles a prosecutor is expected to play, e.g. whether a contribution to national or local crime prevention policy or to act in victim’s interest is expected. It further provides detail as to the setting within which prosecutors work, describing in how far they are politically accountable and/or subject to orders in their daily work.     

Investigation and Prosecution of Large-scale Crimes at the International Level: The Experience of the ICTY

Although the prosecution of large-scale crimes at the internationallevel shares some similarities to the prosecution of organizedcrime at the national level, there are a number of importantdifferences that make the two areas hardly comparable. Two distinctivetraits of international criminal proceedings stand out in thisregard: (i) the lack of any enforcement agency that would allowprosecuting authorities to carry out investigations on the territoryof an interested state without its assistance and the absenceof a general power to carry out such arrests, which render statecooperation of prime importance and (ii) the fact that the proceduralmodel of international criminal tribunals is mixed containingelements of accusatorial (common law) as well as inquisitorial(civil law) systems. As far as prosecutions are concerned, usefulconcepts and procedures adopted from both legal traditions canbe found in the Statute, the Rules of Procedure and Evidenceas well as in the approach of prosecutors, defence counsel andjudges to the introduction of evidence and, more generally,to the manner in which proceedings are conducted. One of themain examples of this is the acceptance of proof of facts bymeans other than oral evidence as a result of the influenceof the civil law tradition, which has progressively made itsway in the procedural system of the International Criminal Tribunalfor the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Yet, on the other hand, somemethods normally resorted to in national criminal prosecutionmay turn out to be useful at the international level, such asresorting to insider witnesses. Although known to domestic systems,such practice may have a particular significance in the contextof the prosecution of international crimes. So have additionalforms of criminal participation (such as the notion of jointcriminal enterprise). Only a mixing of traditional and innovativeinvestigative tools and the proper balance of the differentlegal cultures can ensure effective prosecution of internationalcrimes.     

刑事诉讼的功能性结构及其法理学分析

所有刑事诉讼主体的诉讼功能之间的整体关系构成刑事诉讼的功能性结构,经过法理整合的审判、控诉和辩护三种基本诉讼功能之间的关系的整体构成刑事诉讼基本的功能性结构。以刑事诉讼的功能性结构概念为基础建构的“三分圆”理论模型优越于“三角”理论模型,既可藉以对刑事诉讼的基本结构作定性分析,又可藉以对刑事诉讼的结构模式进行定量分析。当事人主义与职权主义结构模式的区别在于刑事审判程序中证据调查的功能性结构的不同,二者的划分严格讲来只适用于刑事审判程序。刑事诉讼的两重结构不是两种结构。     

论刑事诉讼程序回转

刑事诉讼程序回转,又称刑事诉讼程序倒流,指公安司法机关将案件倒回前一个诉讼阶段并进行相应的诉讼行为。目前国内学界对于在刑事诉讼中处于承上启下地位的检察机关适用程序回转措施的情况尚缺乏研究。撤回起诉是发生在检察环节,前承侦查机关,后接审判机关的具有典型代表意义的诉讼回转活动,从理论与注释的角度对目前我国撤回起诉制度的合法性、正当性进行分析,揭示其存在的问题与缺限,结合立法与司法、理论与实践,以发挥诉讼回转的目的与功效为价值追求,有针对性的提出改进与完善的建议,具有十分重要的意义。     

检察机关适用酌定不起诉情况实证研究

酌定不起诉制度是基于起诉便宜原则而确立的,其通过对轻微犯罪进行非刑罚化的处置,适时终结已经启动的不必要的刑事追诉诉讼程序,是检察机关贯彻宽严相济刑事司法政策的重要载体。由于在法律规定、理解适用、工作机制等方面的原因,目前酌定不起诉的适用率仍然极低,在相当程度上影响到检察机关贯彻落实宽严相济刑事司法政策的效果,亟待改进与完善。     

The truth and the trial: victim participation,restorative justice,and the International Criminal Court

In the field of international criminal justice, the international criminal court (ICC) has been lauded for its integration of victim participants into its legal proceedings. In particular, the ICC’s framework of victim participation has been understood to figure as a balance between retributive and restorative justice as it enables the actual voices of the victims to be heard. However, there has been little research that considers how victim participation works in practice as a form of truth-telling. In order to begin to address this gap, the integration of the ‘voices of the victims’ into the proceedings and outcome of The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo is explored. The forms of harms and experiences that comprise the truth of the events under adjudication put forward by the victim participants are considered, and then how the truth-telling functions of the ICC represent these states of injury. While the ICC’s legal proceedings enable victims to speak of their harms and experiences, their ‘voices’ are largely absent from its judgment. To address this issue, the ICC needs to develop and maintain a level of ‘restorative justice coherence’ to manage victims’ expectations of its justice approaches.