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.     

American politics,British policy: whole of life imprisonment and transatlantic influence

Since the abolition of the death penalty, life imprisonment in England and Wales has had a literal meaning with exceptional rarity. Now though, in the rejection of perceived interference by the European Court of Human Rights in domestic sentencing, the politics of whole of life imprisonment have become exposed, specifically, in the widening applicability of the tariff to those who kill police officers or prison guards. Borrowing from the politics of capital punishment in the United States, in both “acting out” after a particular crime, and the prioritising of victim groups, the most severe penalty in England and Wales is increasingly beginning to mirror how the most severe punishment across the Atlantic is used, represented, and politicised.     

我国无期徒刑制度改革探析

无期徒刑因不需要剥夺犯罪人生命即可永久剥夺其犯罪能力的特点而比死刑有着公认的优势。但在实际执行中。由于减刑、假释标准宽泛而使判处无期徒刑的犯罪人实施终身监禁的可能性几乎不存在,大大削弱了刑罚的严肃性及权威性,并使人们对无期徒刑丧失了应有的信赖感与认同感。对此,我们可以根据犯罪人案件性质、犯罪后果、判决确定之日的年龄、有无劳动能力、悔改表现等因素来分别适用不同的减刑、假释标准;提高被判处死刑缓期执行犯罪分子减为无期徒刑的条件;增加有期徒刑中数罪并罚的最高刑期,限制无期徒刑的适用。     

How Is Criminal Justice Related to the Rest of Justice?

Are principles of criminal justice derived from a broader conception of justice, or does criminal justice involve some of its own distinctive principles such that it is not—for example—an aspect of distributive justice? Examining considerations regarding luck and desert provides an illuminating approach to this issue. The notion of desert has largely been excised from a great deal of recent political theorizing, and in particular, it has been eliminated from many influential conceptions of distributive justice. It is widely held that the pervasiveness of luck renders desert inappropriate to contexts of distributive justice, and incompatible with the freedom and equality of persons in a just political community. Should considerations of desert also have a minimal role in criminal justice—where they seem to still be important? Are considerations of desert in the context of criminal justice consistent with persons being free and equal participants in a just political community? How are principles of criminal justice related to principles of distributive justice and political justice in an overall just society? Many scholars agree that criminal justice presupposes an adequately just society. Still, that leaves open just how criminal justice relates to justice overall. That is the present topic.     

刑事司法解释中的"累犯加重犯"之研究

刑法学界普遍认为关于盗窃罪的司法解释规定了累犯加重处罚原则,违反了罪刑法定原则,侵犯了立法权,应该取消;从抽象的角度来看,司法解释立法化有我国宪法的依据;通过对法定刑的限度以及数额犯的反思,我们认为该司法解释并没有创设累犯加重处罚原则。     

澳门刑法与大陆刑法数罪并罚制度比较研究

本文主要从犯罪竞合及其连续犯、数罪并罚的原则及其漏罪与新罪并罚问题等方面比较分析了澳门与刑法数罪并罚制度的异同.澳门刑法中对罪数及其连续犯的明确界定,以及所规定的罚金转徒刑制度,具有可资借鉴的积极立法价值.     

重构主义的刑法实践模式

重构主义立足于犯罪人与被害者、国家之间的关系网络,强调犯罪人与国家之间的合作,以此作为无罪认定或从宽处罚的依据。我国刑法有关行政或民事处理前置程序、犯罪后及时退还或上交等无罪处理的规定,刑事诉讼法对认罪认罚从宽处罚的规定,都只能从重构主义才能得以合理解释。刑法是法益保护法,而法益保护不只是指向过去,以确保保护法益被损害后的惩罚,同时也面向未来,激励行为人在保护法益被损害后及时修复。重构主义的制度实践,需要正确对待刑法中的"迷途知返条款"建构,强化犯罪治理上的"协约自治",并在部分经济犯、秩序犯中予以推广,使犯罪治理符合经济发展理性与社会发展理性。     

美国少年司法严罚刑事政策的形成、实践与未来

建立独立的少年司法制度，在保护主义的理念下处理少年犯罪，曾经是美国的骄傲，也是其他国家效仿的范本。但自20世纪70年代后期开始，严罚刑事政策开始逐步占据美国少年司法刑事政策的主流，呈现出逐步背弃福利型少年司法传统的趋势。这种转变是在少年犯罪恶化与古典犯罪学派复兴的社会背景与理论背景下发生的，也是对少年司法理念的歪曲。少年司法严罚刑事政策的推行激化了少年法院存废的争论，也遭到了激烈的批评和日益深入的反思。     

司法诚信的制约因素及实现路径——以刑事司法为视角

司法诚信是指司法机关和司法人员通过自身诚信的司法活动达成的司法行为和司法结果为公众认可、相信的状态。司法诚信问题从根本上反映的是司法状况与公众司法需求的差距问题。司法诚信问题的成因既有司法主体、法律制度、司法体制等司法活动各内在影响因素方面的问题,也有社会公众、社会发展变化等各外在影响因素方面的问题。着眼于制约司法诚信实现的各影响因素,分析、梳理我国司法诚信问题的状况、成因,并探索解决对策有利于切实提升我国的司法诚信水平。     

宽严相济刑事政策基本问题再认识

宽严相济刑事政策对惩办与宽大相结合政策的调整与发展,应是一项基本刑事政策。宽严相济刑事政策的内涵应解释为以宽济严,区别对待,宽严审时。其他刑事政策像＂严打＂政策,死刑政策,教育、感化、挽救政策是宽严相济刑事政策的题中应有之义。它不仅是刑事司法政策,而且还是刑事立法政策与刑事执行政策,贯彻实现于刑事立法、刑事司法与刑事执行全过程。     

略论中国刑法中的死刑替代措施

死刑替代措施,是指基于限制死刑适用的目的,对于立法上特定性质的犯罪,司法中特殊情况下的罪犯,不适用死刑立即执行,而代之以其他刑罚处罚方法。死刑替代措施是限制死刑中不可或缺并被证明行之有效的方法。从完善既有方式、探索新的途径入手,死刑替代措施包括死刑缓期执行;严格的无期徒刑;附赔偿的长期自由刑三种。当前,有必要在立法上对刑罚体系作进一步调整、修改、完善,以全面体现死刑替代措施;在司法中,注意发挥死刑替代措施在限制死刑中的作用。     

国际视野下的宽严相济刑事政策

近期国际刑事政策的发展趋势是实行轻轻重重的两极化刑事政策.我国宽严相济的刑事政策是在"严"占主角、"宽"为配角的重刑结构下,作为对"严打"方针的反思而提出的,当前是一项刑事司法政策.其内涵虽与两极化刑事政策有差异,但对犯罪采取区别对待的灵活精神与两极化刑事政策相符合.在"严"的重刑结构下,要发挥"宽"这个配角的作用,只能以司法努力,尽可能多地拓展"宽"的空间和份额.应以"量刑"(裁判)这个司法中心环节为基点,向"量刑"(裁判)的前、后两个阶段和领域进行扩展.     

论我国死刑制度的立法抉择和司法限制

人们日渐清醒地认识到死刑有失公正性和人道性。在废除死刑已经成为国际社会发展趋势的今天,由于我国目前尚不具备废除死刑的条件,控制和限制死刑的适用则成为我国刑法理论界与实务界的当务之急。本文以此为前提,分析了我国刑事立法的抉择,并提出了在司法实践中如何把握限制死刑适用的相关问题。     

“终身监禁”刑事立法的刑罚精准性研究

对本可以判处死刑立即执行的贪污受贿犯罪分子实际判处死刑缓期两年执行的,同时决定死缓期满减为无期徒刑后的终身监禁,既不是执行"死刑"之"重",又不是减为可进一步通过减刑、假释使实际服刑期变得相对比较短的一般"无期徒刑"之"轻",既实现了罪责刑均衡,又实现了震慑其他潜在的贪污受贿犯罪分子的一般预防目的,还能够遏制司法腐败实现司法公正,对贪污受贿犯罪行为进行精准的打击。终身监禁单独设在贪污受贿罪里,正是考虑到贪污受贿罪的特点和国家的刑事政策而作出的,不仅具有很强的针对性,而且在刑罚轻重的"度"上把握到位,体现出刑罚制定和适用的精准性。从刑罚精准性的视角分析,终身监禁不违背罪刑法定原则、罪责刑相适应原则和刑罚效益原则,具备刑罚正当化根据。     

Inhuman and Degrading Punishment,Dignity, and the Limits of Retribution

The recent judgment of the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Vinter and others v United Kingdom provides a much needed clarification of the parameters of the prohibition on inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) as it applies to whole life orders of imprisonment under mandatory life sentences – essentially, life imprisonment without parole. The Grand Chamber's judgment refines Strasbourg doctrine on life imprisonment and the prospect of release and illuminates key principles concerning inhuman and degrading punishment under Article 3 of the ECHR. This article considers the judgment's profound significance in relation to both human rights and penology.     

宽严相济刑事政策应回归为司法政策

宽严相济刑事政策在最初提出时具有明显的司法性特征,但随着实践中从司法理解向立法思路的拓展,该政策完成了向"基本刑事政策"的转变。然而,这种扩张解释没有经过系统论证,也不具有全面充分的理由。宽严相济可以在古代的"宽猛相济"中追溯渊源,其中的"宽"就是以对猛政纠偏的面目出现的。当代宽严相济刑事政策的提出,既是对中国法制传统的弘扬,更是对以前过度强调"严打"的纠正。立法的特点及基本品质表明,宽严相济刑事政策不可能直接表现为立法政策;认为该政策涵括了立法政策,会导致以下逻辑困境:无法正确处理和惩办与宽大相结合政策之间的关系;可能导致重复评价或政策的虚无化;立法有自身的品质要求,其缘由是复杂的,并非宽严相济所能涵盖;如果旧的法律规范已经被新法修改,势必不存在所谓"相济"问题。宽严相济刑事政策应回归为司法政策。     

Public Support for Preventive/Corrective Remedies Against Miscarriages of Justice in Capital Cases

The present study examines public beliefs of Florida citizens about the prevalence of miscarriages of justice in their state and their level of support for various proposed remedies. The study also examines various correlates of punishment beliefs and death penalty opinions. Using a self-administered survey of venire persons called to jury duty, this study found that the public believes that the prevalence of miscarriages of justice in capital cases is quite high. The public is supportive of nearly all of the proposed remedies measured and they are willing to pay more taxes to support the implementation of such proposals. At the same time, respondents report feeling that the officials responsible for such miscarriages of justice should be severely punished. Importantly, the results show powerful evidence of broad societal consensus on each of these issues. Legal and criminal justice policy implications of these findings are offered.     

Kids are Different: The United States Supreme Court Reforms Youth Sentencing Practices for Youth Prosecuted in the Criminal Justice System

In a series of decisions issued between 2005‐2016, the United States Supreme Court relied on emerging scientific research detailing the developmental differences between children and adults to revamp its juvenile sentencing jurisprudence under the Eighth Amendment. The research established that youth’s developmental immaturity reduces their culpability for their criminal conduct, while also demonstrating their heightened capacity for change and rehabilitation. The Court focused on the most extreme sentences for youth, banning the imposition of the death penalty on youth under the age of eighteen in Roper v. Simmons (2005), and severely limiting the availability of life without parole sentences even for youth convicted of murder, in Graham v Florida (2010) and Miller v Alabama (2012). This article traces the Court’s evolution in reviewing sentences for youth in our justice system, and considers how the Court’s reasoning in these cases may influence further reforms in the justice system’s treatment of youth looking ahead.