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。     

论恢复性司法

恢复性司法是古代司法模式的更高层次的回归,目前在数十个国家都有立法或实践,并巳受到国际社会关注.恢复性司法蕴含着被害人、被告人、社区利益平衡理念与恢复关系的司法理念.并且创生了一种新的利益争端解决方式,形成对传统司法之有益补充.由于其有利于完善我国刑事司法体系,解决实际问题,因而有引进的必要.并且我国也具备借鉴恢复性司法之观念和相关制度基础,因而有引进的可行性.     

未成年人刑事司法的模式选择与制度构建

未成年人刑事司法改革,涉及司法模式的选择、特殊原则的确立及具体制度的完善等问题。我国未成年人刑事司法模式选择,应当采用恢复性司法模式为主、传统司法模式为辅的组合设计;除一般性原则外,未成年人刑事诉讼程序还应采用特殊关照义务、非羁押为主、羁押为例外、非刑罚化等特殊原则。在具体制度构建上应建立合适成年人制度、未成年人刑事记录消灭制度、涉罪未成年人社区矫正制度等。     

恢复性司法及其借鉴意义

恢复性司法与传统刑事司法模式存在着许多区别,其最主要特征在于恢复性,是一种通过恢复性程序实现恢复性后果的非正式犯罪处理方法,这种处理方法提供了一条以和平的方式、在当事人充分参与的基础上解决刑事冲突的新途径。恢复性司法已在西方诸多国家得到充分的发展,对我国的刑事司法实践同样也有着重要的借鉴意义。     

恢复性司法理论及其引入与借鉴

作为一种新的刑事司法模式,恢复性司法目前已经在很多国家都有立法和司法实践,并且已经受到了以联合国为代表的国际社会的普遍关注。虽然我国的刑事和解与西方的恢复性司法在基本原则、价值追求方面有相似之处,但并非完全等同,我国虽不宜全盘引入恢复性司法理论,但可以借鉴其合理成分以完善我国现有的刑事和解制度。     

恢复性司法——刑事司法社会化的制度构想

恢复性司法是20世纪70年代开始从北美和澳大利亚等地发展起来的一种新的刑事法治模式。在我国进行司法改革过程中可以有选择地借鉴运用恢复性司法的做法，以促进我国刑事司法的社会化，适当弱化国家在刑事司法中的强主导作用，相应地引导各类社会主体参与到刑事司法过程中来。恢复性司法作为中国刑事社会化的制度性尝试，是以现行刑事司法为主干线的，且每个阶段实践方式并不相同。     

刑事和解的历史解读与现代构建

刑事和解已成为我国刑事法理论界和实务界关注的一个热点问题,是否值得推行在理论界和实务界存在较大的争议。国外刑事和解的思想与实践在产生后,经过恢复性司法、被害人运动、调解、协商性司法等的发展,已具备刑事和解的理论与实践经验。我国古代刑事司法经历了"无讼"、"轻刑"、"和合"等的漫长历史过程,这些思想和实践都影响到了我国近现代的刑事司法理论和实践,经过理论上的整合,我国已经具备了刑事和解的理论根基,在现代社会大背景下,刑事和解无疑具有缩小打击面、缓和社会矛盾、有利于构建和谐社会等积极意义,并符合现代刑事诉讼的精神与原则。鉴于目前刑事诉讼法中对刑事和解制度缺乏相关的规定,建议在修改刑事诉讼法的过程中,将有关合理的刑事和解程序写入法典中,以规范司法实践部门的操作。     

刑事和解制度的理论概述

刑事和解制度是世界现代司法实践过程中所产生的新的司法模式,其改变了传统刑事司法观念,在重新构建刑事法律关系时将被害人融入其中。刑事和解制度的适用蕴涵着恢复性司法的价值理念,使刑法在起到惩罚犯罪人作用的同时保障了被害人的利益,修复了犯罪人与被害人之间的关系,为犯罪人将来重新回归社会提供了有利条件。     

刑事辩护障碍的观念之维

我国刑事立法观念、司法观念、律师观念远远落后于我国现行刑事辩护制度,因此造成了辩护制度与法律观念之间的"不兼容"现象,这种"不兼容"现象使得我国刑事辩护制度裹足不前。所以,刑事诉讼观念的相对滞后是我国刑事辩护障碍的最深层次的原因。     

恢复性司法的思想基础研究

恢复性司法作为一种新的解决刑事案件的方式,在中国受到了很多刑事法学研究者的青睐,针对传统的国家司法模式的弊端恢复性司法似乎为我国的刑事司法改革和刑事一体化进程提供了一种新思路.然而,实践上升到制度化规范化终归需要理论的论证支撑在法律体系内部传统的犯罪观念的更新、被害人主体地位的回归、罪行法定原则从绝对到相对的转变均为恢复性司法的合理性提供依据.同时,后现代主义哲学为恢复性司法提供了统一社会学语境下的论证,为恢复性司法的成长发展铺平了道路.     

平和司法：恢复性司法的本土化——关于平和司法理念与实践的调研报告

平和司法是在学习国外恢复性司法理念、实证分析烟台市检察机关的办案实践、考察外地检察机关的先进经验的基础上提出的全新命题,是恢复性司法本土化的一个尝试。平和司法可分为司法心态(基础要素)、司法模式(手段要素)、司法境界(目的要素)三个层面,与恢复性司法最大的不同就在于它的层次性和层次之间的互动性。平和司法在执法理念上与传统的司法理念有很大的转变,与宽严相济的刑事政策相适应,符合社会主义法治理念的本质要求。实践平和司法将对维护社会和谐稳定、预防犯罪、节约司法资源、维护被害人和犯罪人合法权益具有积极意义。     

Youth Crime: Whose Responsibility?

Responsibility is an increasingly important concept within both political and academic debates about youth justice. As an alternative approach to youth crime, restorative justice ideology has contributed to this debate. Restorative justice emphasizes the importance of repairing harm by encouraging offenders to address past behaviour and to become responsible for future actions. This article reflects on empirical findings from the author's research with 41 young offenders who were the subjects of Referral Orders, a purportedly restorative disposal. It considers how successfully the English youth justice system has adopted this approach, arguing that there is a significant difference between the theory of restorative justice and its use in practice. To some extent, New Labour's emphasis on the criminal justice system has missed the point behind the ideology of restorative justice and the wider opportunities it offers for a proactively restorative society.     

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.     

Restoring the professor and the students: a circle process and contemplative practices in a restorative justice seminar

Limited research is published on teaching restorative justice in the criminal justice or justice studies curriculum in higher education. This article contributes to the discourse on restorative justice pedagogy by discussing a restorative justice seminar that is taught in a circle process with contemplative practices. Students learn the process of circles, one of the major processes in restorative justice practice, by modeling the practice with participation and leadership. Contemplative practices enhance the learning of restorative justice with meditation and reflection.     

Where Do They Belong? Giving Victims a Place in the Criminal Justice Process

Historically, victims once had an active participatory role in the criminal justice process and were responsible for not only initiating but also for prosecuting offenders. In common law countries, victims were gradually sidelined and by the 20th century, their role was reduced to that of a witness to a crime against the state. The exclusion of victims from the criminal justice process is a major source of dissatisfaction for victims as many of them want to participate in the criminal justice process. This has fuelled initiatives with restorative justice that claim to more fully include victims than conventional criminal justice. This paper examines three different approaches found in the literature on how to let victims participate. One view is that victims should leave the criminal justice system and that criminal justice should be replaced by alternative, restorative justice schemes in which victims are granted full recognition and respect for their dignity. A second approach is to integrate restorative practices such as victim-offender mediation in the criminal justice process. The third approach is to integrate victim participation and respect (so-called restorative values) in the criminal justice system. These three approaches are discussed and compared with one another. The paper closes with recommendations for criminal law reform.     

Balancing justice goals: restorative justice practitioners’ views

Despite the importance of facilitators, staff, and volunteers to restorative justice programs, we know very little about what they think about the goals of restorative justice. This paper fills that gap by reporting the findings of a survey of restorative justice practitioners in Nova Scotia, Canada. Participants rated the importance of 29 justice-related goals such as punishment and accountability. The results show how respondents distinguish between, prioritize, and balance competing justice goals. A factor analysis shows how goals cluster together revealing more depth about how practitioners understand goals, such as accountability, that have different meanings depending on the context. The findings are particularly interesting because the restorative justice program in Nova Scotia is deeply embedded in the criminal justice system. The findings speak to concerns about whether programs rooted in the mainstream system risk being diluted by dominant criminal justice system discourses. I conclude that restorative justice practitioners can prioritize the values of restorative justice in a program that is deeply rooted in the mainstream criminal justice system.     

论宽严相济政策指导下的刑事和解制度

刑事和解制度对构建社会主义和谐社会具有价值功能,与我国宽严相济刑事政策具有相融性。司法实践中,应将其统一于社会主义的法治理念、纳入现行法律的框架轨道、融于宽严相济的刑事政策之中进行探索和试行。刑事和解制度最终应转化为国内立法,以法律明文规定的形式加以规范。     

司法的恢复性与社会的和谐化——恢复性司法理论国际研讨会综述

在我国建设和谐社会的宏大工程中,刑事司法是极其重要的一环,因而对发端于西方且正试行于我国实践中的恢复性司法模式展开研究,具有重要的理论价值和现实意义.会议围绕恢复性司法的理论基础、价值取向、实践模式、具体运作及其引入中国的可行性等五个主题,进行了广泛而深入的研讨,取得了丰硕的成果.     

The value of restorative justice*

This paper starts by defining restorative justice and analysing its components. It looks at its practical benefits for the criminal justice system and explores the human benefits, not only for victims, but also for offenders, the families of both parties and the community. The experience of restorative justice in juvenile courts in New Zealand is examined in order to highlight the main benefits of the practice. Studies have shown that restorative justice can have positive effects such as reducing reoffending, providing an insight into offending, bringing together victims and offenders and repairing emotional harm. The paper concludes that although restorative justice on its own will not fix all social problems, it has many positive impacts on participants.