被害人庭审权利的退与进

将被害人定位为刑事诉讼的当事人，有悖公力救济为主的刑诉法发展的历史潮流，偏离被害人保护的国际立法与司法趋势，损害控辩平等诉讼结构的平衡，模糊庭审广场化和剧场化的界限，抹去不同类型被害人之间的实质区别。因此应该在立法上将被害人从当事人地位合理抑制，但在审前程序、量刑程序以及实体补偿上的加强。首先应建立被害人分类制度，限制被害人起诉、上诉、申诉权，加强对被害人的程序保障与权利救济，如侦查阶段申请相关司法机关进行诉前财产保全和证据保全的权利、申请法院调查权、庭审中参与量刑权等，着重建立被害人国家补偿制度。     

对我国刑事诉讼中被害人权利保障的思考

刑事诉讼中被害人的诉讼地位和诉讼权利长期以来出于一个被忽视的状况下,随着国际刑事诉讼制度的改革和发展,被害人的权利保障日益受到了重视。被害人的诉讼权利关系着起诉权的配置,诉讼构造的构建等诸多重要的问题。我国刑事诉讼法也从立法角度确立了被害人的当事人地位以及保障了被害人的诸多权益,但从保护人权保护被害人利益的角度思考我国刑事诉讼法对被害人权利的保障仍有改善空间。     

检察工作中的被害人权益保护

根据我国刑事诉讼法的规定,被害人在刑事诉讼中享有当事人的地位,然而与国外立法及司法实践相比,我国对被害人的权益并未得到切实有效的保护,受到理论界诸多诟病.本文主要论述,在我国现有法律体系之下,检察机关如何发挥检察职能,在刑事诉讼过程中实现对被害人权益的保护.     

试论刑事审判中公诉案件被害人的诉讼地位和权利保障

新刑诉法规定将公诉案件的被害人列为刑事诉讼当事人，提高了被害人的诉讼地位，加强了对被害人权利的立法保障，是新刑诉法在人权保障方面的一大进步。如何正确认识这种进步，如何在刑事司法实践中，尤其是刑事审判工作中，实现对被害人权利的充分保障，是今后刑事审判工作面临的一个迫切问题。本文拟对此作一探讨。一、必须从刑事诉讼理论的高度认识被害人的当事人地位对于被害人尤其是公诉案件的被害人是否应列为刑事诉讼的当事人问题，历来存在两种不同观点。认为被害人不应列为刑事诉讼当事人的观点主要是考虑如果让其独立于公诉机关，…     

刑事诉讼中被害人诉讼地位之微探

综观现行刑诉法,虽然新刑诉法在很大程度上改变了被害人的处境,使被害人获得了当事人的诉讼地位及一些新的权利。但是,由于经济条件、司法水平、文化传统等因素的影响,现行刑诉法对被害人诉讼地位的规定仍存在着不足之处,主要表现在：被害人的诉讼当事人地位具有从属性、被害人的很多诉讼权利得不到保护或确认,以及被害人的损失得不到赔偿等方面。因此根据我国目前被害人权利保护的发展趋势,结合我国的刑事诉讼立法现状,在刑诉中完善对被害人权益的保障,增强被害人的诉讼地位。     

浅论刑事被害人的权利保障

被害人的权利取决于被害人的诉讼地位,在不同的历史阶段被害人的诉讼地位有着明显的差异.从刑罚的执行者、控诉者、证人到当事人,不同的诉讼地位决定了其在诉讼中所享有的诉讼权利不同,体现的诉讼结构和价值取向也不同.当前我国刑事诉讼法虽明确规定了被害人当事人的诉讼地位,但由于权利的不完整,导致被害人徒有当事人的名分.     

浅论刑事被害人的权利保障

被害人的权利取决于被害人的诉讼地位，在不同的历史阶段被害人的诉讼地位有着明显的差异。从刑罚的执行者、控诉者、证人到当事人，不同的诉讼地位决定了其在诉讼中所享有的诉讼权利不同，体现的诉讼结构和价值取向也不同。当前我国刑事诉讼法虽明确规定了被害人当事人的诉讼地位，但由于权利的不完整，导致被害人徒有当事人的名分。     

被害人独立诉讼主体地位的回归

原始的刑事自诉模式下,被害人为刑事诉讼的主体之一。但在漫长的中世纪,被害人陷入证人的境地,国家成为唯一的诉讼主体。当代,虽然被害人普遍地被当作刑事诉讼的当事人,但是并不具有独立的诉讼主体地位,所以传统的刑事诉讼结构一直没有被害人的一席之地。现代刑事诉讼制度应当恢复刑事被害人的诉讼主体地位,并设计相应的制度充分保障刑事被害人诉讼主体地位的实现。     

公诉案件被害人上诉权问题刍议

我国法律虽承认被害人当事人的主体地位,但没有赋予其相应的诉讼权利,尤其是没有赋予被害人上诉权。法学理论界对被害人是否应该拥有上诉权,见仁见智。我们认为应从我国被害人上诉权的理论研究和立法现状出发,结合被害人上诉权的价值,在立法上赋予被害人上诉权。     

论公诉案件被害人诉讼当事人地位的特点

虽然我国刑事诉讼法赋予了公诉案件被害人以当事人的主体地位,但是公诉案件被害人以诉讼当事人角色参诉,不仅在原理上生疏,而且司法实践对之也缺乏清晰的认识。本文从刑事诉讼法的基本原理出发,结合立法精神,对被害人诉讼当事人地位的难理解之处,进行具体分析,并审视被害人诉讼当事人地位的特点。...     

刑事附带民事诉讼制度的立法缺陷与完善

我国现行刑事附带民事诉讼制度在立法上规定太笼统 ,相关法律规定不统一 ,关于刑事损害赔偿的救济途径的法律规定不全面 ;在司法实践中当事人的民事诉讼权利易被忽视、民事证据规则不能完全适用、审判人员审判观念存有误区等问题 ,导致刑事附带民事诉讼制度的存废成为讨论焦点。在立法上明确程序选择权、解决民事刑事法律在刑事损害赔偿方面的实体法规定、提高刑事审判人员的综合专业素质 ,是刑事附带民事诉讼制度得到完善的途径     

刑事反诉制度初探

刑事诉讼中允许反诉具有多重价值,尤其是与刑事附带民诉制度设立的立法初衷高度吻合。然而,在我国刑事诉讼中对于能否提起反诉以及提起反诉的相关程序如何等,现行立法并未规定,且理论上对此也鲜有论者。立法规定的阙如以及理论研究的严重滞后,不仅使刑事反诉实践缺乏应有的指导与依据,而且还直接导致了法院对刑事反诉问题的普遍漠视。在刑事诉讼法即将修改的宏观背景下,应当如何建构我国的刑事反诉制度无疑是必须正视与解决的问题。     

合并与分离:刑事附带民事诉讼制度的反思与重构

刑事附带民事诉讼制度的立法目的在于减轻诉累 ,提高诉讼效率 ,保证正确处理刑事案件 ,维护司法判决的统一性和严肃性 ,维护国家、集体财产利益以及被害人的合法权益。但随着法制建设的不断进步 ,民事实体和程序法律的不断完善 ,刑事附带民事诉讼制度的实践价值受到质疑。同时由于我国在立法规范和制度设计上的缺陷 ,导致附带民事诉讼缺乏独立性、救济范围过于狭窄 ,从而造成了对被害人的利益保护不足。因此 ,总结我国的立法和司法实践 ,借鉴各国立法经验 ,强化刑事案件民事赔偿救济程序的独立性 ,逐步实现刑事诉讼与民事诉讼的分立 ,将成为重构我国刑事附带民事诉讼的立法趋势     

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.     

关于刑事和解的几点看法

刑事犯罪多发背景下,被害人利益难以通过传统刑事诉讼程序获得有效救济,甚至存在被害人在刑事诉讼过程中二次受害的情形,从而引发一系列不稳定社会因素,与建设和谐社会的要求背道而驰。刑事和解正是在被害人保护思想的发展与犯罪人复归思想的兴起基础上产生的以恢复性司法为基本理念以构建和谐社会为终极目标的新型刑事案件解决制度。     

论奸淫幼女犯罪既遂的认定标准

法律的正当理性在于保护人的尊严、自由以及个人与社会生活中的实质性价值,引导社会生活和人类文明的健康发展。我国现行刑法关于奸淫幼女犯罪既遂的接触说标准,在根本立场上是非理性主义、重刑主义的表现,无论是从保护被害人的利益、被告人的人权、促进正常性行为方式和性文化的健康发展,还是从充分体现刑法立法的科学合理性、刑法的谦抑性等立场来说都存在诸多弊端。因此,应当在法理上、立法与司法实务上统一强奸犯罪(其中当然包括奸淫幼女犯罪)既遂的插入说标准,反对并废除奸淫幼女犯罪既遂的接触说标准。     

Secondary Victimization of Crime Victims by Criminal Proceedings

It is conceivable that criminal proceedings cause psychological harm to the crime victims involved, that is, cause secondary victimization. To investigate this hypothesis, negative and positive effects of criminal proceedings were investigated, as perceived by 137 victims of violent crimes who were involved in trials several years previously. Trial outcome and procedure variables were measured as potential causes of secondary victimization. Results show a high proportion of victims reporting overall negative effects. Powerful predictors were outcome satisfaction and procedural justice, but not subjective punishment severity, interactional justice, and psychological stress by criminal proceedings. The practical implications of the results pertain to whether victims should be advised to report the crime to the police or not, and to appropriate prevention and intervention measures of secondary victimization by criminal proceedings.     

How damages recovery actions can improve the fight against corruption: the crisis of criminal law policies and the role of private enforcement in an Italian case of judicial corruption

In many countries corruption is rife, despite the fact that there is a criminal-law legislative framework for corruption. Italy is one of these countries. The commitment of judges and prosecutors to combating instances of corruption is often frustrated by the consequences of the excessive length of the proceedings. The fight against corruption has been carried out mainly in the field of criminal law. The criminalisation of corruption both in domestic and in international contexts is not enough to reduce corrupt practices. In the last decade another front in the fight against corruption has been explored: the private law approach as a complement to criminal law policies. Indeed, the same corrupt practise may be subject both to criminal proceedings by public authority and to civil proceedings by the victims of corruption. The argument that private law instruments may be used in order to achieve a public policy goal is not new and goes beyond the definition of "private enforcement" in the context of competition law. The idea of creating a favourable social and legal background to encourage the victims of anti-competitive practices can also be transposed to the fight against corruption. In fact, in many cases of corruption the low percentage of successful criminal persecution and the class of punishment associated with corruption offences do not represent a deterrent, considering the benefits deriving from bribe. This paper aims to address the question as to whether private law remedies under national legal systems could constitute an effective disincentive against corrupt practices, alongside criminal prosecutions. The case CIR vs. Fininvest, Lodo Mondadori is one of the first cases involving damages actions resulting from corrupt practices, and addresses two of the main obstacles to civil actions in this field: evidence and the quantification of damages.     

试论取消刑事附带民事诉讼制度

我国的刑事附带民事诉讼制度 ,混淆了刑事诉讼与民事诉讼在证明标准和证据规则方面的差别 ,以刑事诉讼程序取代了民事诉讼程序 ,异化了附带民事诉讼的本质 ,不利于维护诉讼双方当事人的实体权利和诉讼权利 ,违背了程序正义的要求。由于刑事附带民事诉讼存在与生俱来的不可克服的内在制度性缺陷 ,无法通过完善刑事附带民事诉讼立法来消除其弊端 ,未来应当彻底取消刑事附带民事诉讼制度     

Towards Good Practice in Juvenile Justice Policy in the Commonwealth

Any witness who is not able to testify due to lack of support or protection is a loss to the proper functioning of a criminal justice system. In this context it is generally accepted that creating a climate for witnesses to testify truthfully and without fear of reprisals is essential to fulfilling the goals of truth and justice. Accordingly, addressing the issues of witness protection and support is a central aspect of a well-functioning criminal justice system; one that contributes not only to the rule of law through more effective investigations and trials, but also ensures that witnesses are treated with the recognition and care they deserve for their contribution to finding the truth. The principle that victims in the criminal justice system must be treated with courtesy, compassion and respect for their personal dignity entails a responsibility on the part of national authorities to realise this basic principle through the development of appropriate mechanisms designed to provide assistance to the victims. However, building effective national victims/witness support and protection is challenging for any state, and especially so for small Commonwealth jurisdictions due to capacity and other constraints. The Commonwealth seeks to provide technical assistance and capacity building to support its members in promoting the rule of law and has developed and disseminated a best practice guide for the protection of victims and witnesses in the criminal justice system. This article seeks to highlight the valuable findings of the Commonwealth guide and to provide guidance to policy-makers, legislators, police, prosecutors and other stakeholders in criminal justice practice.