The Prosecution Service Function within the Swiss Criminal Justice System

The criminal justice system of Basel is described as a cantonal example for Switzerland. Special attention is paid to the Prosecution Service Function within this framework and its relationship to police and courts. The article not only refers to legal provisions but to the factual handling of criminal cases as well.     

The Prosecution Service Function within the Croatian Criminal Justice System

The national criminal justice system of Croatia is described. Special attention is paid to the Prosecution Service Function within this framework and its relationship to police and courts. The article not only refers to legal provisions but to the factual handling of criminal cases as well.     

The Prosecution Service Function within the Spanish Criminal Justice System

The national criminal justice system of Spain is described. Special attention is paid to the function of the Public Prosecution Services within this framework and its relationship to police and courts. The article not only refers to legal provisions but to the factual handling of criminal cases as well.     

Police Prosecution Service Relationship within Criminal Investigation

The article concentrates on the police role in the investigative stage in various criminal justice systems and the relationship with each national prosecution service. It is shown that in this respect the police function varies significantly from country to country. According to its legal competencies and factual procedural possibilities, the article will give a short overview of the national differences but also show that similar mechanisms are developed.     

The Prosecution Service Function within the Hungarian criminal justice system

The national criminal justice system of Hungary is described. Special attention is paid to the Prosecution Service Function within this framework and its relationship to police and courts. The article not only refers to legal provisions but to the factual handling of criminal cases as well.     

Overseeing Criminal Justice: The Supervisory Role of the Public Prosecution Service in China

The Chinese public prosecution service, the procuracy, is modelled on the Soviet Union system and has been accorded the controversial function of supervising other legal institutions in the criminal justice system. Drawing upon my own empirical data on the prosecution of crime in China, this article critically examines the way the power of supervision operates from an internal perspective. It argues that the power of supervision has been used as an institutional asset to secure the interests of the procuracy by analysing its oversight of police investigations and court decisions, the way prosecutors perceive themselves, and the efficacy of the supervision in a comparative context. The current status of the procuracy dictates that it is unable to undertake the role of supervision to safeguard the criminal process.     

Battered Women and the Criminal Justice System: The Service Providers' Perspective

This article reports on a study of the service providers' perspective on what battered women face when entering the criminal justice system. Victim non-co-operation with the system can manifest itself in various ways and at several points in the process. The article begins with a review of the available literature on the criminal justice system's responses to women battering. Then the experiences and perceptions of service providers in Ohio concerning these responses are described, and, consequently, the findings according to factors which may affect service providers responses are analyzed. The article concludes with an assessment of the policy implications of the system's response to women battering.     

欧洲各国检察官在刑事司法制度中的作用

一、检察官的职权 1. 检察官作为公共当局,代表社会和公共利益,确保对违法者进行刑事追究法律的执行,既保护个人权利,又注重提高刑事司法制度所必需的效率。2.在所有国家的刑事司法制度中,检察官拥有以下权力：(1)决定是否起诉或继续追诉;(2)出庭支持公诉;(3)对法院的全部或部分裁判可以上诉或进行上诉。3.在某些国家的刑事司法制度中,检察官也拥有以下权力：(1)对执行国家刑事政策进行调整,以适应各地和地方的实际情况;(2)进行侦查,指导或监督侦查;(3)保证被害人得到有效的帮助;(4)监督法院裁判的执行等。二、检察官履行职权…     

The Salvadoran Criminal Justice System

This research analyzes comparative data on offenders, offenses, sentences, and dispositions for El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and the United States. This paper is based upon a larger research project examining political death and homicide in El Salvador through 1984. The analysis examines the effectiveness of the Salvadoran criminal justice system before and after initiation of Its civil war.

The statistics showed that El Salvador's capacity to investigate homicides and detect murder suspects had improved over the last 10 years or so, whereas its ability and length of time to prosecute, try, sentence, and commit offenders had deteriorated over this same period. Substantial numbers of Salvadoran criminals were apprehended, arrested, tried, sentenced, and incarcerated for routine crimes of violence and property. On the other hand virtually none of the perpetrators of thousands of political murders were apprehended by the Salvadoran Government despite the increase in arrest and sentencing for routine homicides. This may be indicative of a lack of commitment by the Salvadoran Government to deal with political killings by death squads.     

Prosecution and Diversion within Criminal Justice Systems in Europe. Aims and Design of a Comparative Study

This article presents the aims, approach and design of a 11 countries study on diversion and prosecution in European Criminal Justice Systems. The basic assumption is that the flood of proceedings is mastered by procedural short cuts and simplifications with the public prosecutor as the key player. The article describes the methods developed in order to compare the different national concepts and and competencies of criminal justice agencies and procedures. Furthermore, it demonstrates the interdependencies of the various articles in this double issue focusing on different parts of the criminal justice system from police to the court.     

少捕慎诉慎押刑事司法政策研究

少捕慎诉慎押刑事司法政策是推进国家治理体系和治理能力现代化,实现强制措施制度回归诉讼保障功能,应对犯罪结构发生重大变化和深化落实宽严相济刑事政策的必然要求。贯彻少捕慎诉慎押刑事司法政策应当在厘清其内涵的基础上规范其适用范围并遵循一定的原则,其实施路径包括正确把握逮捕的条件;进行实质化的羁押必要性审查;用好、用足不起诉制度;与认罪认罚从宽制度合理衔接以及充分发挥辩护制度的重要作用等。检察机关作为捕诉职能的承担者,是该政策有效施行的“第一责任人”,应当充分发挥“司法纽带”作用。时机成熟时,应当对该政策进行延伸,形成“少拘少捕慎诉慎押慎判”的系统的刑事司法理念和政策。     

刑事自诉制度研究

我国在刑事起诉制度上实行以公诉为主、自诉为辅的原则。1996年修正后的刑事诉讼法大幅度扩张了刑事自诉案件的范围,致使我国自诉制度在刑事起诉制度中的地位和作用明显得以提升。在这一背景下,我国刑事自诉制度中应解决的问题也越来越多并日渐凸现了出来,亟需研究、完善。     

论我国刑事诉讼中的证据展示制度

在当事人主义诉讼模式下流行的证据展示制度应在我国刑事诉讼中被确定 ,它能使辩护制度摆脱困境 ,有利于实现司法公正 ,提高诉讼效率。同时对我国证据展示的原则、范围、程序设计以及制约因素提出见解。     

刑事自诉制度重构刍议

目前的刑事自诉制度是随着新的《中华人民共和国刑事诉讼法》的颁布而建立起来的。应当说 ,中国的刑事自诉制度的立法初衷是美好的 ,但是在具体的司法实践操作中 ,这种制度已日见其弊端 ,而产生这些问题的根源在于司法权力的不合理分配。要解决司法权力的合理分配问题 ,在于加强检察机关由法律所赋予的各项职能 ,而这一点正是重新构筑新的刑事自诉制度的关键。     

我国审查起诉程序中和解机制的建构

近年来,尽管学界和实务界由于恢复性司法理论的影响对审查起诉程序中的和解问题进行了较为深入的探讨和大量的实践探索,并取得了一些有价值的成果。但也不能否认,不论是取得的学术成果还是实践探索的效果,均还未对制度的建构产生实质性的影响。基于不同思路的比较和我国国情的现实考量,提出以现行审查起诉程序为制度平台并以辅助性制度的设立为保障建构我国审查起诉程序中和解机制的设想。     

The Establishment of the OVM System in Criminal Prosecution Procedure of China

近年来,尽管学界和实务界由于恢复性司法理论的影响对审查起诉程序中的和解问题进行了较为深入的探讨和大量的实践探索,并取得了一些有价值的成果.但也不能否认,不论是取得的学术成果还是实践探索的效果,均还未对制度的建构产生实质性的影响.基于不同思路的比较和我国国情的现实考量,提出以现行审查起诉程序为制度平台并以辅助性制度的设立为保障建构我国审查起诉程序中和解机制的设想.     

The Courts in a Fragmented Criminal Justice System

The U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice under President Johnson in 1967 outlined a central role for courts in the criminal justice system. That role, however, has been somewhat diminished by the dominance of plea bargaining and the legislative enactment of mandatory minimum sentences that limit judges’ discretion. At the same time, judges have become more involved in specialized courts dealing in cases involving drugs and mental illness. A major topic of concern is the lower courts, which in many areas have changed little since the 1960s Commission. In those places, the traditional adversary process is not operating well, with many defendants pleading guilty unnecessarily in a system that may be designed primarily to collect fees. In violent crime cases, the imposition of capital punishment remains a controversial issue for states that is not likely to be resolved by a new national commission. The central court functions of sentencing and overseeing plea bargains are discussed elsewhere in this volume.