重罪案件刑事和解的理论思考

重罪案件刑事和解要厘清刑事和解正义与以钱买刑的认识,刑事和解本质观与报复主义的认识,刑事和解刑罚观与罪责刑相一致原则的认识,从而在实践中,正确把握重罪案件刑事和解的尺度。     

误解与重读——以传统赎刑为背景研究刑事和解

已成为社会热门话题的刑事和解，一方面受到学术界和司法实务界的追捧，另一方面，也遭遇到是“以钱赎刑”、“花钱买刑”的质疑。笔者以为，传统赎刑与刑事和解是不同的。尽管两者之间表面上存在一些相似性，刑事和解也存在一些漏洞仍需完善，但不能据此就简单地以为刑事和解就是“赎刑”的复活。同时，对于传统赎刑制度，我们也不应简单地否定，它作为曾在中国历史上存在三千多年、贯穿中国封建社会始终的一种完备的制度，蕴含着大量理性的成分。我们应该对其中与刑事和解相契合的部分进行创造性的现代诠释，为完善今天的刑事和解服务。     

西方恢复性司法与我国刑事和解的关系

近年来刑事和解制度在中国广泛兴起,对此制度,不少法学研究者都从＂恢复性司法＂的角度进行分析和解读。刑事和解制度尽管从理念上或是制度设定上看,都可以从＂恢复性司法＂中找到一些相似的方面,但是二者在本质上仍属于两种不同的司法模式。本文从渊源、参与者范围、改革动因以及处理方式等方面进行论证,以期对我国刑事和解制度的完善有所裨益。     

刑事和解的正义价值探析

刑事和解制度是加害人与被害人直接对话协商解决刑事纠纷的方式,它具有公平价值、效率价值、节约司法资源等多重价值,以恢复正义理论、平衡理论、叙说理论为三大理论基础,并以正义价值为核心价值。司法正义是一种矫正的正义,而刑事和解的正义价值就是对矫正正义的矫正,它的正义是＂和谐的正义＂,是＂无害的正义＂。但是,刑事和解从其产生开始就存在价值瑕疵,其在刑事司法实践中存在诸多的缺陷,为了避免它的缺陷所带来的弊端,我们必须构建一套科学合理的刑事和解制度,要明确界定刑事和解案件适用范围与适用刑事和解的前提条件,并且从程序上完善刑事和解制度的监督制约机制等。     

刑事和解在我国的双重现状简析

随着全球范围内＂恢复性司法＂运动的兴起,刑事和解作为一种国际思潮和新型的案件解决方式,已被许多国家和地区所接受。在以构建社会主义和谐社会为目标的当代中国,刑事和解也迅速成为我国刑事司法领域的热门话题,然而刑事和解在我国却呈现出一种独特的双重现状。本文指出归纳并解释这一特殊现状,并对其产生的原因予以着重分析,可以简要预测和展望这一制度的未来趋势。     

刑事和解在公安工作中适用的若干分析

当前中国的刑事诉讼法正处于转型期间,刑事和解虽然是西方恢复性司法思潮下的产物,但作为一种新的纠纷解决机制样式正是适应这样的趋势所产生的。因为其与中国构建和谐社会、加强司法民主建设的背景息息相关,所以,在构建＂和谐社会＂的背景以及宽严相济的刑事政策的倡导下,我们应当将刑事和解更好的适用于公安侦查当中,有效地解决实践运行中存在的问题。     

刑事和解制度之实证研究——以检察院的司法实践为视角

修订后的《刑事诉讼法》于2013年1月1日正式实施,该法明确规定了当事人和解的公诉案件诉讼程序,即刑事和解制度,这一制度的实施有利于社会关系的修复与和谐社会的构建,但在取得成效的同时也存着不少以钱赎刑和司法腐败等现象。本文从概念、目的与意义、适用范围等方面对刑事和解制度进行了全面的阐述,并根据司法实践中存在的问题提出了相应的对策,坚决杜绝以钱赎刑与司法腐败的现象。     

论我国刑事和解的理论基础与制度构建

刑事和解作为一种新型纠纷解决制度,立基于和合文化、恢复性司法、司法处遇个别化和利益共赢等理念,在司法实践中行之有效但又备受争议与质疑。厘清刑事和解的内涵,明晰刑事和解的适用范围与条件,进而设计不同诉讼阶段刑事和解的适用程序,解决现行刑事和解试点中的冲突与失范,应当成为制度化构建中国范式刑事和解的实然径路。     

刑事和解的新亮点和注意的几个新问题

随着新刑事诉讼法的通过,刑事和解被正式写入其中,这一制度来源于司法实践,是我国一项优良的司法传统。为了推动新刑事诉讼法的良好实施,笔者对刑事和解适用中注意的一些问题作一些浅显分析,期许这一制度在今后的实施中能发挥更大的作用,促进社会和谐发展。一、新修订的刑诉法中关于刑事和解的新亮点（一）确定了刑事和解的适用范围长期以来,法律没有明确规定公诉案件可以刑事和解,但是在司法实践中其适用是＂公开的秘密＂。     

背景与困境:刑事和解制度的理性考察

刑事和解是西方社会在恢复性司法理念下所孕育的一种刑事案件解决模式.其理念产生和植根于其所存在社会的个人本位刑法观、刑事契约观和复合正义刑罚观.刑事和解制度的出现,提出了一种全新的解决刑事案件的方案.但不容忽视的是在中国,刑事和解本身的个人本位刑法观与国家本位刑法观之间、去刑化思维与罪刑法定、罪责刑相适应原则之间以及复合正义刑罚观与公众的报应正义的刑罚观之间的对立、背离与对抗.而刑事和解在中国情境下将可能出现对人人平等的刑事法治理念的冲击,对加害人、被害人的合法利益的损害,形成不公正的司法制度从而毁灭刑法的公众认同的制度隐患.理性地对待刑事和解制度,应当是我们所应有的态度.     

Is restorative justice for sexual crime compatible with various criminal justice systems?

In addition to the more conventional approaches of the criminal justice system, this article suggests that there is a need for restorative justice as another method of addressing sexual crime. In support of this view, the present article explores the possibility of a hybrid justice system based on a complementary relationship between restorative justice and the criminal justice system. An analysis of the limits of the criminal justice system and the need for restorative justice in the contentious area of sexual crime will be followed by a detailed examination of key justice considerations when trying to marry both criminal justice and restorative justice perspectives. Such considerations include: the meaning of justice; legislation; sentencing principles; due process; victims’ rights; and the location of restorative justice within/alongside/outside the criminal justice system. The aim of this article is to determine whether it is possible to reconcile two seemingly juxtaposed methods of justice delivery in the context of sexual crime in order to create a hybrid system of justice that best protects and responds to the rights and needs of victims and offenders.     

论恢复性司法的本土资源与制度构建

恢复性司法缘起于上世纪70年代的刑事司法实践,并逐渐成为影响传统刑事司法的重要司法范式。恢复性司法是在反思传统司法的基础上产生、发展起来的。可以弥补传统刑事司法过于对抗、忽视被害人等缺陷,从而迅速风靡于西方国家。我国无论是文化观念,还是刑事司法制度与实践,都存在着契合于恢复性司法的因素。刑事司法制度的完善,有必要吸收恢复性司法的理念,结合我国刑事司法的本土资源,建立恢复性司法制度。     

General systems theory and criminal justice

Criminal justice agencies are organized sequentially — “output” from one agency is “input” to the next — but most scholars argue that criminal justice is not a system in a theoretical sense. In this article, it is argued that general systems theory (GST) reveals important insights into criminal justice structures and functions. Specifically, it is argued that the criminal justice system processes “cases” rather than people, and that the common goal of criminal justice processing is to “close cases so that they stay closed.” It also is argued that processing capacity progressively declines, in that at each system point the subsequent agency cannot input as many cases as the previous agency can output. Each agency therefore experiences “backward pressure” to close cases in order to reduce input to the next agency. Overall, this article highlights that criminal justice agents and agencies are best understood as operating in the context of the larger whole, thus it is concluded that criminal justice is a system in the sense of general systems theory.     

论宽严相济刑事政策的定位

宽严相济的刑事政策是惩办与宽大相结合刑事政策的继承和发展。刑事政策根据其指导功能的不同,可分为刑事立法政策、刑事司法政策、刑事执行政策。宽严相济对司法领域而言,可以说是刑事司法政策;但它也指导刑事立法、刑事执行,因而也是刑事立法政策、刑事执行政策。刑事政策根据其所处层次的不同,可分为基本刑事政策和具体刑事政策。宽严相济是基本刑事政策,"严打"、"少杀、慎杀"等是具体刑事政策,后者都是前者的组成部分。说宽严相济是刑事司法政策,并不否定宽严相济是基本刑事政策。     

新自由主义对美英国家刑事法制的影响及反思

从一国或地区的政治经济体制来理解其刑事法制,可以以相对宏观的视角把握其刑事法制脉络。美国刑事法制自20世纪70年代以来发生了深刻变化,从刑事法制基本观念到具体实践都渗透强烈的报应主义色彩,而隐藏其后则是新自由主义思潮。美国刑事法制的转变也影响着英国等国家。对这一思潮进行研究,一方面可以对这些国家刑事法制过去半个世纪发展脉络进行整体把握,另一方面也为分析研究这些国家刑事法制提供了一个更具批判性的视角。     

Criminal Justice Through “Colorblind” Lenses: A Call to Examine the Mutual Constitution of Race and Criminal Justice

A central paradox defines the scholarship of criminal justice and race: while racial disparities manifest throughout the criminal justice system, it is often portrayed as race‐neutral. We identify two central paradigm shifts: one in penology (that focuses on risk) and one in racial ideology (that focuses on colorblindness) that create a perfect storm; criminal justice apparatuses produce an illusion of racial neutrality while exacerbating racial disproportionality. We join an expanding list of scholars encouraging discourse that engages critical race theory on an empirical level and import this approach to the consideration of race within the criminal justice system. We identify issues with the conceptualization and operationalization of race as a variable within criminal justice research and recommend that scholars consider the mutual constitution of race and criminal justice. That is, scholarship must examine and empirically measure how race and criminal justice institutions actively form and inform each other.     

论刑事法的历史分析

历史分析，作为法学重要的研究方法之一，对于刑事法研究具有积极意义。对中国当代刑事法进行历史分析，并非去发现所谓的“民族精神”，而是寻找刑事法律制度得以形成的脉络，以及在法制演进中的政治、经济和文化因素。在刑事法学研究中运用这种分析方法，具体表现为历史比较研究、历史的社会研究以及历史的价值研究。对中国刑事法发展作历史研究，应区分不同时代，并有目的性地进行研究，进而挖掘其中可为当代刑事法发展利用的有益因素。     

恢复性司法对我国刑事诉讼制度的影响

恢复性司法是一种不同于传统司法模式的新型司法模式,它寻求尽可能利用罪犯、受害者和社区的积极和自愿参与的方式,恢复受犯罪影响的所有当事方的一切权益。我国引入恢复性司法既具有刑事司法实践、刑事观念、刑事制度和社会发展的基础,也与我国当前的刑事诉讼制度存在一定冲突。恢复性司法实践与理念对我国刑事诉讼可能产生的影响,突出表现在刑事观念、诉讼制度和检察机关法律监督方式等诸多方面。     

Crime and punishment in Rwanda

In 1994 Rwanda was devastated by genocide that killed hundreds of thousands of people and destroyed the country’s infrastructure. The credibility of the criminal justice system was questioned following the genocide because it had failed to stop the slaughter and may have contributed to it. In order to address these concerns, Rwanda rebuilt its criminal justice system in light of its history and troubled past. The success of the reestablishment may be debated but there can be no question that Rwanda had a tabula rasa with which to form an effective criminal justice system. Examining the law details the ideals of the criminal justice system as established post-genocide. These ideals exemplify the democratic process. Examining current events allows for a practical assessment of the success of the new system. In both theory and practice the country’s criminal justice system has changed drastically since 1994.     

Restructuring Justice in Russia: A New Era of Challenges

This paper reviews the criminal justice system in Russia from historical and contemporary perspectives. The realities of greater liberalization and the dissolution of the Central Soviet Government will have a significant impact of the future criminal justice program. Based on a criminal justice delegation including meetings with Soviet criminal justice participants, it is argued that the Soviet will likely lean toward incorporating a more continental crime reduction ideology instead of a Western-style Common Law that emphasizes legal process rather than crime reduction.