恢复性司法与未成年人犯罪预防

随着改革开放的进一步深化、社会结构的进一步调整，未成年人犯罪形势日益严峻。如何针对未成年人犯罪的特点，采取切实有效的预防措施，成为我国当前刑法理论和司法实践中讨论的热点。     

论我国未成年人恢复性司法的构建

恢复性司法是一种不同于传统的报应性司法模式的新型司法模式。这种司法模式特别适合于未成年人犯罪的处理，也和我国的传统法律文化契合，因此，应在我国建立起未成年人恢复性司法制度。在建立这项制度时，应借鉴西方国家一些成熟的经验，同时结合我国的历史传统和现实国情。     

检察机关处理未成年人刑事案件引入恢复性司法理念的思考

恢复性司法（Restorative Justice）作为一项在世界范围内兴起的刑事司法革新运动,在国外的司法实践中显示出了较强的生命力,特别是对未成年人刑事案件的适用已成为通例。随着我国司法改革的不断深入,在现行法律框架下,学习和借鉴恢复性司法解决刑事冲突的有效方法,必将对预防和减少未成年人犯罪,缓解矛盾,促进社会和谐产生积极作用。     

浅析未成年人犯罪的刑诉司法模式

随着未成年犯罪率的上升、犯罪形式的多样化等新情况的出现,我国传统的未成年犯罪刑事司法模式日益凸显其滞后性。恢复性司法旨在建立共赢的犯罪处理机制,保障双方当事人的权利,弥合被害人的损失和创伤,这对未成年人犯罪的预防和控制都具有至关重要的作用。     

论恢复性司法在未成年人刑事司法中的实现路径

恢复性司法是当前少年司法理论的一个热点讨论话题,也是少年司法实践探索中的新举措,由于理论尚不完全成熟,很多问题没能形成定论,而且相对缺乏现行法律的依据,因此,司法实践中的探索大多还停留在理念层面,没有能形成突破,制约了该举措在实践中的引入。本文试图从恢复性司法的基本内核入手,分析恢复性司法的最本质的内涵,找出实现其本土化的理论基础和法律依据,深入分析司法实践探索中存在的不足,提出正确的实现路径选择。本文认为将恢复性司法引入我国未成年人刑事司法实践必须严守法律底线,需要树立新型的未成年人刑事司法理念,需要形成司法一条龙的配合机制,将审前社会调查纳入恢复性司法程序之中,需要着力构建当事人之间进行对话的机制,需要适度推行行刑社会化,需要加强与理论界的合作,需要争取立法的支持。只有这样才能在实践探索中取得突破。     

论恢复性司法模式在中国国情下的应用

我国现行的刑事司法的本质是以犯罪人为中心的,这种模式不利于犯罪人的犯罪修正。恢复性司法模式作为一种新型刑事司法诉讼模式,能够对我国现行刑事司法模式起到补足和修正的作用。鉴于此,我们应结合我国经济社会发展的实际情况设计并完善好这种制度,使恢复性司法模式具有更高的价值取向,使其成为推进我国法治进步的重要因素。     

恢复性少年刑事司法的正义性探析

正义是司法的灵魂。恢复性司法在处理少年犯罪实践中的尝试，为我国应对严峻的少年犯罪开辟了新的思路，但对恢复性司法存在的误读，也引起了人们对恢复性少年刑事司法正当性的质疑。恢复性司法与传统报应性司法对正义有着不同的理解，但恢复性少年刑事司法所体现的兼顾多方利益的实体正义与多方参与的程序正义，对落实“双保护”原则及构建和谐社会所具有的独特作用，让我们相信构建具有中罔特色的恢复性少年刑事司法制度之必要。     

司法社工介入未成年人涉罪的优化途径

在多种因素的影响下,我国未成年人犯罪近些年呈现出上升的趋势。为了探索在现实中如何有效解决这一问题,本文通过分析未成年人犯罪的问题,思考司法社会工作如何有效介入、如何预防未成年人犯罪,如何推动未成年人司法和社会工作的合作。     

恢复性司法与青少年心理恢复

恢复性司法是在司法中促进当事人双方的调解,寻求当事人之间、个人与社会之间关系的重新整合。恢复性司法的基本原理,包括恢复性司法的理论假设、关注的焦点、目标和根基。恢复性司法对英国青少年的实践发展较快。在对青少年的恢复性司法中,心理学的作用具体表现为排除不适合参与调解者、促进恢复性司法中调解的效果和心理学家作为恢复性司法中调解的协调人。     

在我国引入少年恢复性司法模式评析

少年恢复性司法模式是西方国家近年来兴起的一种以“创伤修复”为基本目标的调解模式,它代表着一种崭新和科学的少年司法模式,与我国传统的司法制度和观念有着不同程度的契合,我国应在排除障碍的基础上引入该模式。     

The Spiritual Components of Restorative Justice

The concept of spirituality in restorative justice practice is recognized as important but is often fuzzy and vaguely understood. This study did a content analysis of restorative justice texts and found nine distinct components of spirituality: transformation, connectedness/belonging, common human bond, repentance, forgiveness, making right a wrong, balance/harmony, rituals, and unexplained spiritual phenomenon. The conceptual clarification of the relationship between spirituality and restorative justice gives mediators/facilitators of restorative justice dialogue more tools to deepen their interactions with victims, offenders, and community members. Furthermore, delineation of these nine components offers researchers a framework for the development of instruments or tools that can be used to assess participants' experiences in restorative justice dialogues.     

Repositioning Restorative Justice in Europe

Abstract

Over the last 20 years, the European Union (EU) has invested considerable amount of resources in supporting policies and legislation that promote mediation and other restorative justice (RJ) practices at the national and regional level. Alongside these developments a series of legal safeguards, standards, and regulations were introduced to mainstream restorative justice in European criminal justice systems. While we are far from claiming that a unified restorative justice model exists across European countries, the standardization of restorative justice through top-down approaches raises serious concerns around its viability as a community-born ethos. This article draws from the findings of an EU-funded research project that focused on the implementation of the restorative justice articles of the. Victims’ Directive. The article argues that if restorative justice is not repositioned in Europe through innovation and bottom-up structures of community, unregulated, unregistered, and localized projects, it will soon face its demise. The mainstreaming, regulation, and state control of restorative justice in Europe must be balanced against what Nils Christie identified as its original intention of returning conflicts re property.     

Four Challenges in the Future of Restorative Justice

Abstract

Restorative justice (RJ) emerged in the late 1970s as an alternative to conventional youth and criminal justice practices. Since this time, RJ has experienced rapid growth in theory and practice. At the same time, much of this growth has come from expansion in lower-end criminal justice responses to crime, and in the increasing use of the term “restorative” for a widening host of practices and interventions. RJ has also faced problems related to its increasing institutionalization, resulting in divergence from earlier aims and goals. In this article, we set forth what we see as the four biggest challenges facing the future of RJ, namely problems related to definition, institutionalization, displacement, and relevance of RJ practices. We follow with discussion of possible future directions of RJ.     

恢复性司法与中国少年司法制度建设

一段时期以来,国外倍加推崇的恢复性司法理念和具体方案不仅引起我国法学界、司法界的高度关注,而且一些基层司法机关还展开了恢复性司法本地化实践,其中在少年司法领域尤为活跃,为此,有必要围绕恢复性司法来深入探讨中国少年司法制度建设这一课题。     

我国未成年犯非监禁刑执行机制构建刍议

对于未成年犯,应最大限度地适用非监禁刑,已成为理论学界及司法实务界的共识,但对于非监禁刑执行机制的构建这一研究领域,却很少有涉足。立法的缺失以及理论的不足导致了在实践中,非监禁刑的执行流于形式,没有发挥出应有的作用。目前急需构建独立的未成年犯非监禁刑执行机制,既体现出刑罚的威慑力和强制力功能,又能充分考虑未成年人的特殊性,确保未成年犯顺利完成重归社会化的进程。     

论未成年犯网络信息化教育的实践

新时期网络教育对未成年人社会化影响全面介入,对未成年犯网络信息化教育的实施势在必行。未成年犯教育矫正工作受到新的挑战,教育的途径、手段和方法有待突破和改进。网络信息化教育的探索和实践,使未成年犯的个性化教育得以扩大,网络教育资源得以共享,教育规模和教育空间得到极大的延伸。从全面提高未成年犯综合素质,完善心理健康,形成健全人格的角度,对于提高改造质量有着重要的意义。     

涉罪外来未成年人平等权的司法保护问题研究

随着外来未成年人犯罪的增加,其司法权的平等保护问题也越来越成为社会关注的重点。我国相继制定了一系列规定和措施,以司法保护的方式来维护他们的合法权利,实质上也体现了对未成年人平等权的保护。笔者通过对涉罪外来未成年人平等权保护的现状和成因进行分析,提出了对策思考。     

论未成年人犯罪刑事程序的实质保护

未成年人犯罪也属于犯罪种类的一种,从犯罪性质上看和成年人犯罪没有什么区别,但是,由于未成年人特定的生理和心理特点,以及国家在未成年人案件上特定的刑事政策和价值取向,未成年人犯罪的适用程序又有其特殊性,本文主要是从程序方面,针对我国在未成年人案件的理论和司法实践中的一些争论热点及缺陷和误区,展开分析和论述,借以抛砖引玉,希望对我国未成年人的刑事程序保护提供一点建议和意见。     

Rethinking Prison Disciplinary Processes: A Potential Future for Restorative Justice

Abstract

The movement for restorative justice (RJ) has struggled with marginalization on the soft end of the criminal justice system where the threat of net widening and iatrogenesis looms large. To realize the full potential of RJ as an alternative philosophy of justice, restorative practices need to expand beyond the world of adolescent and small-level offenses into the deeper end of the justice system. Disciplinary hearings inside of adult prisons may be a strategic space to advance this expansion. This article presents findings from a study of prison discipline in four U.K. prisons. The findings strongly suggest that in their current form such disciplinary proceedings are viewed by prisoners as lacking in legitimacy. Although modeled after the adversarial system of the criminal court, the adjudications were instead universally derided as “kangaroo courts” lacking the basic elements of procedural justice. Based on these findings, we argue that RJ interventions may offer a viable redress to these problems of legitimacy which, if successful, would have ramifications that extend well beyond the prison walls.