行政人员与司法人员交流协作的域外做法及借鉴

法国、德国、美国普遍存在行政人员与司法人员交流、执法司法协作的做法。我国特邀检察官助理制度本质上也属于行政人员与司法人员执法司法协作,这一制度有助于提高执法司法水平、节约成本。借鉴域外相关经验,我国可采取扩大特邀检察官助理来源,要求检察人员到行政机关交流锻炼;加强检察机关与行政机关协作,由行政机关派员参与临时检察办案组,以最低成本实现行政人员辅助检察办案等措施完善相关制度。     

检察官办案责任制改革的进路分析——兼对主任检察官制度的反思

主诉(办)检察官制度没有解决检察行政化问题,改革收效有限。为进一步推进检察官的办案责任制,祖国大陆试行主任检察官制度改革:主任检察官是独立办案主体,对本办公室(办公组)内的所有检察业务负责。然而,与我国台湾地区的制度原型比较,祖国大陆主任制的功能定位有误,承办检察官独立司法人格仍未形成,主任检察官与部门负责人的关系并不明朗;主任检察官的身份待遇重保障而轻制约。检察官办案责任制改革的关键在于解决检察行政化问题,这要求检察院人员分类管理,取消业务部门的行政管理层,进一步明确承办检察官的独立地位,业务序列增设主任检察官,协助检察长进行监督。     

“厉兵秣马”是队伍前进的基础

目前检察机关仍然借用行政机关的人员管理模式，没有形成自己的具有特色的检察官管理体制。从主诉检察官制度的实行、检察官工资待遇、干警培训教育情况三方面分析，现有检察官管理体制存在诸多弊端。实行检察官等级管理体制，即“职业检察官制度”，同时进行工资制度和晋级测试制度等配套改革，可以使《检察官法》规定的检察官等级管理模式能够得到真正的落实，从而减少司法运作中的行政色彩，给予检察官应有的待遇，提高检察官素质和工作效率。具体讲，是在保留行政长官系列的同时，起用检察官等级的管理效用，用检察官等级来区分检察干警的地位、工资待遇、表明检察官身份和国家给予检察干警的荣誉。     

各国和地区检察官选任制度之比较

作为检察机关的工作人员,检察官的选任直接影响到检察机关的形象、履职的质量,进而影响到社会的公平正义。检察官的选任制度体现了检察官素质能力水平,并推动了检察官职业能力的发展。本文从检察制度角度,通过对德、法、日及我国台湾地区检察制度的分析,探究检察官选任的标准。     

美国企业犯罪的审前转处协议研究

美国针对企业犯罪建立了特殊的审前转处程序,办案检察官可以与涉罪企业签署暂缓起诉协议和不起诉协议,如果企业能够在考察期限内完成协议下的义务,则不会被审判和定罪。在美国经济危机时期,该制度较好地为企业的生存和社会公共利益的维护提供了保障。该制度以美国司法部内部的政策性文件为依据,赋予了办案检察官较大的自由裁量权,法院基本无权干预。美国理论界的争论主要围绕三对冲突关系:社会公共利益维护与企业“大到不用判刑”特权的冲突、检察官的转处裁量权与程序正义的冲突、司法部内部行为与立法/司法管辖权的冲突。在我国面临企业犯罪处理困境的当下,该制度及其相关理论能够为我国“司法行政部门帮扶企业”政策的践行提供经验借鉴。     

检察官身份保障制度之完善

检察官职业身份保障制度,对于检察官依法独立公正行使职权,维护社会公平正义具有非常重要的意义。我国现行的检察官身份保障制度存在法律规定不完善、制度不健全,身份保障水平偏低等问题。完善检察官身份保障的体制机制,可以从完善任免辞退的条件和程序、完善退休制度、建立有限的职务豁免制度、完善惩戒制度、完善控告申诉保障制度以及相关配套制度建设等方面入手。     

呼和浩特市推行主诉检察官制度亟待解决之问题

主诉检察官制度又称主诉检察官办案责任制，它是指在检察长和检察委员会的领导下，主诉检察官依法相对独立地办理案件并承担相应责任的一种办案制度。目前，从全国试点工作反馈的信息表明，该制度的实施淡化了办案管理工作的行政色彩，明确了检察官的职责，缩短了办案周期，提高了案件质量。尤其值得注意的是。该制度确立了以主诉检察官为核心的业务工作运行机制，强调了个人在业务工作上的主观能动性，有助于激发检察官的个人潜力，     

对检察一体化与检察官独立的思考

检察一体化与检察官独立是两个对立的命题,当前我国检察一体化对外行使检察权整体性比较强,但检察官独立却缺乏相应的制度保障,并在制度和考核上对检察官独立进行制约。本文指出检察一体化和检察官独立要相互结合,共同促进。     

建立中国特色检察官助理制度初探

检察官助理是协助检察官从事检察业务的辅助人员。我国由于法学教育体制单一。法学人才的实务培训制度不规范，有妊要建立检察官助理制度。我国建立检察官助理制度的设想是：分别设置实习检察官助理、检察官助理、特别检察官助理职位。     

论国外行政公诉的产生与发展

行政公诉是一种检察官针对侵犯公共利益的违法行政行为而提起的一种诉讼类型,从国外行政公诉的发展过程看,这种诉讼之所以由检察官提起,是基于其公益代表人角色的定位;行政公诉能够弥补传统行政诉讼仅仅由利害关系人发动的局限,从而更有利于公共利益的维护;同时,这一制度也填补了审判权监督行政权时"不告不理"的空白,有利于检察权配合审判权以实现对行政权的监督。     

检察权谦抑性的法理基础

刑事诉讼中的检察权行使,要尽可能地保持克制、妥协、宽容,这就是检察权的谦抑性.检察权的谦抑性是受刑事诉讼法学、刑法学、犯罪社会学和刑事政策学等学科理论和实践发展的深刻影响而形成的.检察权行使的谦抑性最终要由具体的检察官来体现和贯彻,因此,一方面要从立法上人手;另一方面,要通过培养心怀谦抑的检察官入手,从而使刑事法的谦抑理念与检察官内在的谦抑品性相协调.     

AIDS-related dementia and competency to stand trial: a potential abuse of the forensic mental health system?

Public health officials, hospital administrators, forensic directors, jail wardens, judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys must confront the issue: how should cases of individuals with AIDS dementia be treated when they are found to be permanently incompetent to stand trial? Although charges are sometimes dismissed in advanced cases of dementia, the more common pattern involves placement of the defendant in a public facility while awaiting trial. The refusal of some state facilities to accept these patients raises a host of legal, moral, and medical questions that virtually every urban state's forensic system will have to consider in the near future.     

PREVENTIVE DETENTION

The authors suggest that the probability of an arrestee engaging in violent crime before trial should be recognized as on independent and legitimate concern of the courts. Some of the major practical and legal considerations in implementing a pretrial detention option are discussed. A model is proposed which would give prosecutors a uniform basis for the decision to request a judicial order to detain pending trial. The model is based upon a modification of the Sellin-Wolfgang index of seriousness.     

刑事回避对象之比较——兼评我国侦诉人员的回避

基于刑事回避制度诉讼价值意义的认识 ,有必要从回避对象的角度考察、分析、比较古老的回避制度在现代主要国家呈现的不同面貌特征。以此为鉴 ,反思我国相关制度 ,对有关现行立法试作以下变革 :取消侦查人员和公诉人的回避对象资格。     

Beyond Discretion: Prosecution, the Logic of Sovereignty, and the Limits of Law

Today it is widely recognized in both academic literature and the mainstream media that prosecutors have substantial discretion. Yet prosecutorial decisions involve, in our view, something more than a straightforward exercise of discretion. In this article we move from the language of discretion to that of sovereignty to describe prosecutorial power. In so doing we want to move from the language of administration to the language of power. Focusing on the decision not to prosecute, we argue that prosecutorial decisions participate in, and exemplify, the logic of sovereignty and its complex relationship to legality.
By drawing on Carl Schmitt and Giorgio Agamben, we seek to recast prosecutorial decision making as something that allows prosecutors to grant exemptions from the reach of valid law. The sovereign power of prosecutors is most vividly on display when they decline to bring charges where there is a legally sufficient basis for doing so. By exercising what is, in most jurisdictions, an all but unreviewable power, they can and do exempt individuals from the reach of valid law.     

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.     

Performance-based evaluation,state compensation and judicial ecology: dynamics of China’s detention review practice

Through participatory observation and in-depth interviews with thirty-four practitioners, this article pierces the veil of the dynamics of China’s pretrial detention system by looking into various socio-legal factors which may affect law enforcement in China. When the prosecutors make their decisions on detention in practice, a variety of factors such as state compensation, performance-based evaluation as well as judicial ecology such as public opinion, power struggle, and judicial coordination all play a role. The dynamics of China’s detention system, through governing the prosecutors’ daily operations and the procuratorate’s routine policy-making, often distort the pretrial detention system that is mainly regulated by the Criminal Procedure Law and in practice, result in a high rate of custody. The dynamics also suggest a non-autonomous criminal justice system in China, meaning that extra-legal factors usually influence, complicate, and sometimes even re-direct China’s development of the rule of law.     

司法改革视野下检察业务考评机制改革新思考

检察业务考评对驱动检察机关职能发挥、实现检察机关价值有重要作用。在本轮司法改革前,我国检察业务考评机制呈现层级化运作方式,由上级院考评下级院,检察官个人不作为考评主体;此后,各地在层级化考评运作下,探索构建对员额检察官个人的考评机制。我国检察业务考评的发展回应了检察改革实践,但尚未充分适应中国特色检察制度的要求,尚未做到完全按照检察规律办事,急需创新制定适应司法改革的考评措施。应从层级化考评的完善、创新设置个人考评、考评的组织与程序三方面进一步改革。     

论侦查权配置的内在原理

刑事侦查权的配置应当围绕检察官为中心而进行.作为侦查权的法定主体,检察官具有控制警察活动的合法性,负有防止警察国家重现的重要使命.我国目前一定程度上存在着警察权恣意、失范,侦查程序缺乏监督、制约的情况,在这样的背景下,强化检察机关的权限和地位,将其塑造成为审前程序的主导者和警察权力的控制者,就成为必然的路径选择.     

The Causes and Consequences of Job-Related Stress among Prosecutors

Despite a growing body of literature documenting work stress among employees in various fields, there is a dearth of research that explicitly assesses the impact of different aspects of prosecutors’ working conditions on individual prosecutors and their organizations. Drawing on a sample of prosecutors in a southern state in the U.S., we first used OLS regression to examine which work-related stressors are important in predicting their levels of work stress, job satisfaction, and turnover intention. Using path analysis, we then explored the links between these stressors and a set of proposed mediating and outcome variables. We also conducted unstructured in-depth interviews with a subset of the sample to supplement and further illustrate the observed patterns. While job demands and organizational support play the most important roles in explaining the work stress of prosecutors, they do not have direct impact on the prosecutor’s commitment to the job. The roles played by psychological and emotional stressors are found to be negligible. Job-related stressors do not lead to turnover intention directly but indirectly through work stress and job satisfaction with a notable exception of the public/media stressor. This study provides a scientifically-based perspective regarding which working conditions should be addressed to maintain healthy and productive working environments among prosecutors.