我国社区矫正工作机制探究

社区矫正是与监禁矫正相对的一种刑罚执行方式,我国在法律上已正式确立社区矫正制度。社区矫正作为一项严肃的刑罚执行活动,需要健全的法律制度保障,但是在我国《刑法》和《刑事诉讼法》中对社区矫正具体工作机制问题涉及较少。探究社区矫正工作机制,对于完善社区矫正制度,更好地运行该项制度,实现刑罚执行方式跨越性发展有重要意义。     

我国社区矫正制度的构想

社区矫正行刑方式符合行刑由严酷走向宽缓的国际趋势.我国刑罚体系过于偏爱监禁刑而忽视社区行刑,且试行的社区矫正制度适用范围过于狭窄,制约了社区行刑的潜在生命力.建构社区矫正体系,设立强制社区服务令制度,提高社区矫正制度的地位,使社区矫正与监禁行刑并驾齐驱,在现阶段的法治中国成为必要.     

对我国社区矫正制度的观察与思考

社区矫正制度的建设与完善是我国刑罚改革的重头戏,社区矫正的适用,是我国的刑罚不断走向文明,跟进世界潮流的重要一步。本文分别从社区矫正的理论渊源、发展历程、存在的问题等方面对我国社区矫正制度进行反思,以探求我国社区矫正制度的进阶之路。     

对当前社区矫正现状的分析和建议

社区矫正作为与监禁刑相对应的刑罚执行方式,是刑罚个别化、社会化、人道化的具体体现,也是国家尊重和保障人权在刑罚领域的具体落实。社区矫正制度已成为当今全球刑事政策发展的趋势。本文通过对当前社区矫正试点情况的分析,认为我国社区矫正虽然取得了一些成就,但还存在着不少现实问题。本文针对我国社区矫正制度存在的问题,通过与国外社区矫正制度相比较并结合我国的实践情况,提出了完善我国社区矫正制度一些建议。     

完善社区矫正管理体制之构想

完善凸显刑罚本质和惩罚功能的社区矫正管理体制已经成为我国现代刑罚执行制度改革的当务之急。推进这项改革的基本路径应以社区矫正刑罚本质法理重塑为核心,从而弥补社区矫正刑罚功能缺失的缺陷,确立社区矫正刑罚目的的价值取向;同时,以社区矫正管理体制法律完善为重心,尽量克服社区矫正管理体制不顺的制度弊端,合理配置刑罚执行权能、不断提升刑罚执行效益。     

改革和完善我国社区矫正制度之研究(下)

三、我国社区矫正制度存在的缺陷及其影响 由于方方面面的原因,我国的社区矫正制度远不如西方发达国家、甚至一些发展中国家完善。与这些国家相比,我国的社区矫正制度存在以下缺陷及消极影响。 (一)现行法律规定的社区矫正种类太少。我国现行的刑罚体系是以监禁刑为主。非监禁的刑罚方法在法律规范中处于从     

社区矫正契机下的刑罚变革

社区矫正制度在我国的性质是刑罚的执行方式.《关于开展社区矫正试点工作的通知》所规定的试点应用对象不尽合理.由于我国有富于特色的管制刑制度,因此没有必要增设独立的社区矫正刑种.作为行刑社会化的典型代表,社区矫正制度有可能对我国以自由刑为主的刑罚体系形成冲击,借此,改革我国刑事执行制度.     

对我国社区矫正制度的思考

社区矫正是与监狱矫正相对应的一种刑罚执行制度。我国的社区矫正制度刚刚处于试点阶段,本文就社区矫正制度的概念,价值及其现状几个方面对社区矫正制度进行了分析,并对社区矫正制度的运行与完善提出了浅显的见解。     

社区矫正在中国的出路

社区矫正作为一种更文明、更科学的刑罚执行方式,在国外已广泛适用。甚至,社区矫正制度的适用已成为衡量一个国家刑罚制度文明与否的标志。然而,社区矫正对我国来说还是一个刚引进不久的“舶来品”,对其理论研究还很少。实践中,我国的社区矫正更是问题重重,困惑叠生,使得在很多方面流于形式。本文拟对我国的社区矫正加以分析研究,以期能找出社区矫正在中国的出路。     

浅谈社区矫正制度

社区矫正制度作为一种与监禁刑相对的刑罚执行方式,在世界各个国家有着广泛的应用,我国的社区矫正制度起步较晚,目前正处于不断探索和完善的阶段。笔者从社区矫正制度的意义、我国社区矫正制度的现状着眼,对我国社区矫正制度如何发展与完善提出一些看法和建议。     

Community Service Orders in Hong Kong, England, and Wales: twins or cousins

Hong Kong's Community Service Order (CSO) is anchored in the probation service and has not had to face problems related to the cultural divide and professional rivalry between community service and probation staff similar to England and Wales. CSOs in both jurisdictions differ in offenders' minimum age and in seeking offenders' consent and have been rarely used for young offenders. They have widened the net of social control, and there have been difficulties in positioning them in the sentencing tariff. Although retributive penal practices might have crept into Hong Kong after China's takeover in 1997, its CSO has retained rehabilitative elements. In England and Wales, the renaming of CSO as the Community Punishment Order reaffirmed its retributive nature, however the Pathfinder projects have taken it back to its origins as a rehabilitative measure. We suggest that CSOs should move further toward restorative justice by the involvement of victims in the choice of community services.     

社區矯正寫入刑法的重大意義

随著行刑社會化的發展，社區矯正在世界各國被普遍採用。我國此次《刑法修正案（八）》将社區矯正正式寫入刑法，使得「社區矯正」一詞第一次正式出现在刑法條文的规定中。這是對社區矯正在我國試行七年以来積極意義的重要肯定，也是對我國刑罰輕缓化、行刑社會化發展的進一步考驗。筆者認爲社區矯正寫入刑法有以下五方面的重要意義。     

刑罚进化论——从刑事政策角度的批判

刑罚进化论对刑罚制度的线性发展持乐观态度 ,认为越是到现代 ,刑罚越人道和轻缓 ,这种观念影响较大 ,但是很值得质疑。作者通过对近现代刑罚改革思潮进行分析后指出 :所谓的刑罚进化论是不能成立的 ;刑罚的正当性与进化论无关 ,而只与刑事政策的运用 ,以及规范有效性的维持、规范的稳定有联系。坚持刑罚进化论命题 ,在刑事法领域会产生负面效果。一方面 ,刑罚进化论强制人们忍受残酷、多余的刑罚制度 ;另一方面 ,它也会导致阻碍刑罚改革的惰性思维的产生。     

Community care as a penal sanction

Conclusion The community participation model, which rests on the philosophy of reintegration, is an important trend in recent penal policy. The sentence of community care in New Zealand is an illustration of that trend. However, there are lessons to be learned from the past four years. Clearly, the model has its practical limits. The extent to which the community wishes to participate in the provision of penal services is undoubtedly overstated by its proponents; as a result, community involvement is unlikely to be forthcoming unless the government provides adequate funding to groups and individuals providing such services to offenders. Even then, a gap is likely to remain between the rhetoric and the reality of community participation. The majority of the community care programs are bureaucratically organized, professionally staffed, and undertaken within the context of structured thera peutic regimes. They thus fall well short of the ideal of spontaneous, neighborly concern, which is such a strong part of the Western ideology of community. While some programs, particularly cultural programs offered by ethnic minority groups, have involved comparatively noninstitutional and informal relationships between sponsor and offender, these are few in number and have made little impact so far on the way in which the criminal justice system deals with offenders from ethnic minority groups. In sum, there is little to distinguish the majority of programs from conventional attempts at rehabilitation. Although higher levels of funding and more vigorous community development efforts by probation officers may stimulate community involvement, the New Zealand experience suggests that, at least in cultures without established processes of informal care and control, the community participation model will not be the new panacea in penal policy.This is a revised and expanded version of a paper given at the second conference of the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, Parliament Buildings, Ottawa, Canada, August 1–4, 1988.B.A., University of Auckland 1971; LL.B. (hons.) University of Auckland 1973; Ph.D., Cambridge University 1978.     

社区矫正司法适用问题思考

《刑法修正案(八)》规定对被判处管制、宣告缓刑、裁定假释的犯罪人实行社区矫正,这是我国首次将社区矫正作为一种非监禁刑罚执行方式写入刑法。刑法规定的社区矫正与我国2003年试点施行以来的社区矫正相比较,在社区矫正适用范围与对象上存在不同,现行的社区矫正在适用中,还存在管理机构、矫正内容、方法等方面的协调与规范问题。     

当代中国刑罚制度改革论纲

China’s penal system has to be reformed systemically on the basis of achievements in recent years. In terms of the penalty types and the penal system, it is necessary to further restrict death penalties through the legislative and judicial measures, improve or enrich liberal punishment, property punishment and identity punishment, and adjust the penal system as a whole. In terms of the sentencing system, the principle shall be expressly narrated and the standard for sentencing shall be explicitly specified and certain discretion for sentencing shall be legalized. With respect to the penalty execution system, the idea of open execution of punishment shall be established and the community correction system shall be established. With respect to the penalty elimination system, supplementation shall be taken for the time period of execution and corporate crimes, and the activation for prerogative of mercy. As for application of penalties to special groups, the penalties for juvenile offenders shall be fully relieved and reformed on purpose, and the penalties shall be mitigated for elderly offenders. Zhao Bingzhi, Ph.D, professor, supervisor for docotoral candidates, dean of the College for Criminal Law Science and the School of Law at Beijing Normal University, president of the Criminal Law Research Committee of China Law Society, standing member of China Law Society, vice-chairman of China Branch of AIDP, member of the 5^th Evaluation Group of Legal Science of the Degree Committee of State Council, invited consultant of the Supreme Court of the PRC, consultant of the Law and Policy Research Division of the Supreme Procuratorate of the PRC, and the 1^st Ten Distinguished Young Jurists by China Law Society, visiting scholar at the School of Law of Duke University, USA. His main research covers: Chinese criminal law, foreign criminal law and international criminal law     

刑罚轻缓、人权保障与《刑法修正案(八)》——以相关国际公约为蓝本的分析

对照《公民权利与政治权利公约》分析,《刑法修正案(八)》在死刑改革方面的进步值得肯定,但与公约要求的、逐步限制死刑适用以最终废除死刑的目标仍有距离;参照《北京规则》、《美洲人权公约》等分析,新修正案对未成年人、老年人犯罪适用刑罚增加了从宽处理的规定,实现了对弱者的人权保障,但该修正案在建立未成年人及成年人前科消灭制度等方面仍有不足;比照《东京规则》等国际公约分析,其以社区矫正入刑化为代表的非监禁刑之完善,体现了我国对国际公约相关要求的积极回应。     

当代中国刑法法典化研究

刑法的法典化是统一刑法典的制定和完善过程。当代中国刑法的法典化程度,与中国社会形势的变迁、法治的整体发展水平、立法技术的提升密切相关。中国刑法的法典化是历史与现实的必然选择,具有重要的法律文化价值、比较法价值、社会价值、现代法治价值和规范价值。中国应综合运用外部和内部策略,制定和发展形式合理、内容全面、科学的统一刑法典。     

Alternatives to imprisonment in Kenya

Conclusion In spite of the wide variety of sentencing options available in Kenya, the courts overwhelmingly choose to sanction by imprisonment. Even default on the payment of a fine can lead to a prison term where extramural penal employment would at the very least be more economical and more beneficial to the community. In my view, the main purpose of penal policy is to provide an opportunity for the offender to reintegrate himself or herself into society and to rectify the damage both to the victim and to society caused by the crime. Imprisonment frustrates these objectives and should be reserved for habitual serious offenders and for grave offenses that do not readily lend themselves to alternative sanctions. Even in such cases, however, compensation can be ordered in addition to a prison term.Settlement, restitution, and similar approaches should become routine for all minor offenses. Putting primary reliance on alternative sanctions should produce considerable savings in costs and in manpower, alleviating some of the pressure now experienced by an overburdened criminal justice system. To derive the greatest benefit from alternative sanctions, we need also to review and integrate indigenous traditions of community-based dispute resolution into the statutory structure.This is a revised version of a paper presented at a sentencing workshop organized by the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, the Legal Resources Foundation, and the Law Development Commission, Victoria Falls, Zimbabwe, September 1–5, 1993.I am grateful to Professor Daniel Van Ness, Legal Advisor on Criminal Justice to the Government of Malta; and to Madeleine Sann, Director of Publication,Criminal Law Forum, for their suggestions.M.S., Vikram University (Ujjain, India) 1968; LL.B., Vikram University 1975; LL.M., University of London 1976.     

中國社區矯正工作的穩步推進與發展

2011年2月25日,十一届全國人大常委會十九次會議審議通過《中華人民共和國刑法修正案（八）》（以下簡稱《刑法修正案（八）》）,並自2011年5月1日起施行。《刑法修正案（八）》的通過,在我國刑事法律中第一次封社區矯正制度作了明碓规定,是封多年來司法行政機關牽頭组織、具體實施社區矯正工作的肯定舆法律碓認,是贯徼落實宽嚴...