构建刑事被害人经济救助制度的思考

依据我国法律,刑事被害人因犯罪行为所遭受的经济损失,主要是通过提起刑事附带民事诉讼,由被告人及其他赔偿义务人依法赔偿。但是,我国仍然亟需在立法上建立刑事被害人经济救助制度,对救助对象、救助条件、救助金额、救助程序等做出明确规定。因此,在借鉴了国外立法及总结我国各地司法实践的基础上,对我国构建刑事被害人经济救助制度提出了几点设想。     

论刑事被害人救助的理论基础

刑事被害人救助制度(Criminal victim assistance)是指对因为犯罪受到侵害的直接被害人和其一定范围的近亲属,通过法定救济程序,给予相应经济救助与精神抚慰的社会安全及司法保护制度。对刑事被害人救助的基础理论有很大的争议,主要有国家法律责任说、社会福利说、刑事司法体系支持说、犯罪风险分担说、侵权赔偿替代说、平衡保护说、预防犯罪说、公共援助说、社会保险说和社会正义说等。我国建立对刑事被害人的救助制度需要考虑各学说的立足点,合理的借鉴国外的经验,考虑到救助的目标并结合我国国情进行。建立以社会福利说为主,合理吸收其他各学说的优点,尤其是强调对刑事被害人救助中国家的重要作用以及风险的分担的原则是比较可行的,也是我国目前对刑事被害人救助合理可行的选择。     

刑事被害人国家救助制度初探

我国立法上没有刑事被害人国家救助制度,对被害人的保护和救济有所忽视。建立刑事被害人救助制度,既是保障人权,实现司法公平正义的具体体现,也是构建司法和谐的必然要求。本文在剖析我国刑事被害人权利保护现状的基础上,分析了刑事被害人国家救助制度的价值,并提出我国构建刑事被害人国家救助制度的理论基础。     

我国刑事被害人国家救助制度之构建

建立刑事被害人国家救助制度对于加强被害人权利保护和增进社会和谐有着重要意义.当前我国各地已经开始尝试对被害人进行国家救助,建立统一规范的刑事被害人国家救助制度工作提上日程.从理论层面探讨,刑事被害人国家救助制度之构建,主要包括救助原则、救助对象、救助条件、救助范围、救助机构和程序、救助立法等内容.     

我国刑事被害人国家救助制度的立法构建

我国每年因犯罪行为侵害而陷入生活困境的人数达到百万,建立刑事被害人国家救助制度具有一定的必要性。从对国外立法经验和发展规律分析来看,刑事被害人国家救助的性质一般为社会保障性质。我国对刑事被害人国家救助的主体范围界定、申领程序、救助资金标准等应参照这一理念做出符合国情的规定,保证救助制度的可实行性,从而达到形式正义向实质正义的转变。     

贯彻司法为民 彰显人文关怀——关于刑事被害人救助制度若干问题研究

现代刑事被害人国家救助制度源于英国，是体现司法人文关怀的一项重要措施。在我国，现代意义上的刑事被害人救助制度肇始2004年，2009正式建立。随着实践的发展，司法实务部门和理论界对刑事被害人救助制度的研究也不断深入，取得了不少可喜的成果，对一些重大问题的认识也渐趋统一，但对我国刑事被害人救助制度究竟应当如何定位，也就是说我国刑事被害人救助制度的法律属性是什么，还需要进一步明确。作为一项新生事物，我国经济、社会发展的实际情况决定了刑事被害人救助制度在我国的发展必然是一个渐进的过程，短期内不可能期望该制度全面解决刑事被害人所面临的各种困难，因此必须要将刑事被害人救助制度与现行的其他制度结合起来，形成一整套刑事被害人保障机制。     

以科学发展观为指导建立刑事被害人国家救助制度

以科学发展观为指导建立刑事被害人国家救助制度,体现了国家对被害人权利的保障,是刑事被害人获得救助的重要途径,对现代法治国家的建立,和谐社会的构建具有重要的意义。本文首先分析了建立刑事被害人国家救助制度的司法实践价值,阐述了以科学发展观为指导建立刑事被害人国家救助制度的必要性。同时,就刑事被害人国家救助的救助形式、数额和经费来源进行了深入的探讨,具有一定的参考价值。     

建立被害人救助制度需立法提速

近年来，刑事诉讼在加强刑事被告人的权益保护方面取得一定成绩，却忽略了对刑事被害人应有的关怀，而立法上欠缺导致其合法权益难以保障。本文从立法缺陷、被害人面临的生存现状和救助缺失、建立制度的价值与意义以及立法提速的可行性进行分析和论证，提出我国应尽快建立被害人救助制度，并借鉴国外立法先例，在立法上提速。     

刑事被害人救助社会福利说之提倡

刑事被害人救助制度是指对因为犯罪受到侵害的直接被害人和其一定范围的近亲属,通过法定救济程序,给于相应经济救助与精神抚慰的社会保障制度.对刑事被害人救助的基础理论主要存在国家法律责任说和社会福利说的争议.社会福利说契合了刑事被害人救助的实质,既顺应刑事被害人救助制度的发展潮流,又适应我国刑事被害人救助的实践,应该成为我国刑事被害人救助制度立法的基本思想.     

检察机关建立“另类刑事被害人”救助制度的探讨

本文立足于我国对刑事被害人保护的实际情况,对检察机关建立＂另类刑事被害人＂救助制度进行了简要的探讨,以期对该制度的建立及完善有所助益。     

我国刑事被害人社会补偿制度之构建

以犯罪人为中心的刑事政策使被害人权利遭到严重忽视,尤其在经济上难以获得充分赔偿,易于导致被害人的"二次伤害"。建立刑事被害人社会补偿制度,将刑事被害人的权利保护纳入社会保障法体系范畴已被世界多国选择。我国应引入社会补偿制度,重新审视国家与社会、救助与补偿之间内涵与区别,明晰刑事被害人社会补偿制度的性质,构建补偿对象清晰、补偿条件明确、资金来源充裕、管理机构权威的刑事被害人社会补偿制度,以实现我国刑事被害人权利的充分保障。     

刑事被害人当事人化的反思与制度重构

刑事被害人当事人化的实质是犯罪损害追诉方式的公私合一,该制度设计混淆了公益和私益两种不同性质的诉讼,导致两种权益保护相互冲突进而对刑事司法结果公正造成负面影响。公私分离是刑事被害人去当事人化的当然制度选择,其立法对策主要包括在刑事立法中确立被害人为特殊诉讼参与人、废除被害人在刑事审判中就定罪量刑发表意见的权利、废止被害人刑事自诉权和切断其引起刑事二审、再审的程序路径。同时需要完善相关配套举措,如允许被害人对其物质和精神损害单独提起民事诉讼、完善精神损害赔偿制度、建立刑事被害人国家补偿制度等。     

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.     

刑事被害人国家补偿制度构想

刑事被害人的权利救济是现代人权保护的一个重要问题。当被害人遭受犯罪行为侵害而又难以得到充分赔偿时，为保护被害人权利，彰显社会公平，应当由国家给予一定的物质补偿。目前，一些国家已先后建立了刑事被害人国家补偿制度而我国目前还没有建立。因此笔者建议，在建设社会主义和谐社会的进程中，我们也应立足中国国情，借鉴国外经验，早日建立符合中国国情的刑事被害人国家补偿制度。     

论我国应建立犯罪被害人国家补偿制度

犯罪被害人国家补偿制度是指遭受犯罪侵害的被害人或其近亲属在一定条件下可获得国家提供的经济补偿的法律制度。这一制度在西方国家运行40年来已取得良好的社会效果,为我国提供了可借鉴的有益经验。我国目前的被害人保护立法有严重缺陷,缺乏对犯罪被害人的人文关怀,由此还引发诸多社会问题。在我国建立这一制度是实现正义、保障人权、控制犯罪、完善法制的必要,也是切实可行之策。     

Human Trafficking for Criminal Exploitation: The Failure to Identify Victims

Human trafficking for criminal exploitation is one of the lesser-known forms of human trafficking. The failure of the criminal justice system to identify the victims of this type of trafficking can lead to a failure to take the victim-centred approach to trafficking espoused in the international legal instruments that regulate the matter, an approach that emphasises the protection of victims and respect for their rights. In light of earlier findings of the existence of unidentified victims of human trafficking for criminal exploitation in several European countries — the UK, Ireland, Spain, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands — a qualitative study was conducted, consisting of 37 in-depth interviews with practising criminal justice professionals and victim service providers in Spain. Because undetected victims of human trafficking for criminal exploitation are usually treated as offenders, the main aim of this research with professionals was to determine the causes of the criminal justice system’s failure to identify the victims of this specific form of trafficking in order to prevent them from remaining hidden victims.     

被害人陈述之比较研究

被害人陈述作为我国一类独立的刑事证据 ,它与美国被害人影响陈述截然不同 ,也与犯罪嫌疑人、被告人供述和辩解及证人证言存在着程度不同的差异。对它们进行比较研究 ,既有利于正确揭示被害人陈述的特征 ,合理界定它在未来刑事证据立法中的地位 ,也可以借鉴美国被害人影响陈述制度 ,加强我国刑事诉讼中的被害人人权保障。     

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。     

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.