检察机关合规不起诉裁量权限制的三种模式

作为一种以合规激励为核心的合作性司法模式,合规不起诉制度是起诉便宜原则的又一适用场域。如何明确和限制检察机关的自由裁量权,是在探索合规不起诉制度时应该关注的问题。从比较法的视野来看,美国的内部控制模式和英国的司法监督模式是目前限制合规不起诉裁量权的两种主要代表模式。内部控制模式以美国司法部的内部文件的约束为主要手段,侧重发挥合规不起诉制度的犯罪预防和社会治理功能。司法监督模式以法官的司法审查为主要手段,关注对合规不起诉裁量权的实际控制问题。我国对合规不起诉裁量权的限制采用的是双重控制模式,即以保护民营企业这一基本原则与合规不起诉制度的适用条件为内部约束,以第三方监督评估机制与合规听证为外部监督机制。作为主管部门的最高人民检察院,可以通过制定司法解释或者规范性文件,总结实践经验,进一步细化合规不起诉适用对象的遴选条件,明确有效合规的标准,促进程序公开透明。

Three Approaches of Limiting the Discretion of Prosecutors’Compliance Non-Prosecution

As a cooperative judicial model with compliance incentive as the core,compliance non-prosecution is another applicable field of the doctrine of prosecuting discretion.How to define and limit the discretion of compliance non-prosecution of procuratorial organs is a problem that should be paid attention.From a comparative perspective,the“internal control”in the United States and the“judicial supervision”in the United Kingdom are two main approaches to limit the Prosecutors’discretion.The former is mainly restricted by internal documents,focusing on the effectiveness of corporate crime governance,and the latter is mainly supervised by judges’judicial review,mainly focusing on actual control of the Prosecutors’discretion.China adopts the“dual control mode”:taking the basic principles of private enterprise protection and the applicable conditions of compliance non-prosecution as internal constraints,and the third-party supervision and evaluation mechanism and compliance hearing as external supervision.As the competent department,the Supreme People’s Procuratorate should unify the effective practical experience in the form of judicial interpretation or normative documents,further refine the selection conditions of applicable objects,promulgate effective compliance standards,and promote openness and transparency of procedures,etc.