认罪认罚从宽制度下律师的地位与作用——以三个诉讼阶段为研究视角

认罪认罚从宽制度实施以来，在提高诉讼效率方面效果显著，但同时也伴随着架空程序正义的风险，律师实质性参与是认罪认罚从宽程序之正当性基础。加之认罪认罚从宽制度推动着协商性司法的进程，中国特色的控辩协商机制来日可期，律师的有效参与更应成为完善制度构建的应有之义。然而司法实践的现状与制度设计的初衷相去甚远，律师分别在侦查、审查起诉、审判各诉讼阶段发挥不同作用的同时也面临不同的参与困境。结合域外经验加以审视，认罪认罚从宽制度框架下的律师参与存在辩护理念和立法规制的双重缺失。具体而言，应推动有效辩护的理念建构和精细值班律师的制度建构，探寻律师实质性参与认罪认罚从宽程序的合理路径，从而有效保障被追诉人的诉讼权利，助力认罪认罚从宽制度的健康推进。

The Position and Function of Lawyers under the System ofPleading Guilty and Accepting Punishments with Leniency: From the Perspective of Three Litigation Stages

Since the implementation of the System of Pleading Guilt and Accepting Punishment with Leniency (hereinafter “SPGAPL”), it has achieved remarkable effect in improving the efficiency of litigation, but at the same time, it is accompanied with the risk of ignoring procedural justice. The substantive participation of lawyers is the legitimate basis of the SPGAPL. In addition, the SPGAPL promotes the process of consultative criminal justice, therefore, the negotiation mechanism between prosecution and defense with Chinese characteristics can be expected in the future, and the effective participation of lawyers should be the due meaning of perfecting the system. However, the current situation of judicial practice is far from the original intention of the system design. Lawyers play different roles in the investigation, review and prosecution, trial, and they also face different participation difficulties. Based on the overseas experience, the lawyer's participation under the framework of the SPGAPL has dual defects of defense concept and legislative regulation. Specifically, we should promote the construction of the concept of effective defense and the system construction of on-duty lawyer, and explore the reasonable path of lawyers' substantive participation in the SPGAPL, so as to effectively protect the litigation rights of the accused and help the healthy promotion of the SPGAPL.