修订药品管理法，强化药品执法行刑联动机制——中美药品行刑联动机制比较研究

本文旨在理顺药品行政执法与刑事司法的关系,强化药品执法力度,为修改《药品管理法》奠定理论基础。文章运用规范研究方法、比较法学和案例分析法对中美药品行刑联动机制作深入的比较分析。通过研究发现我国药品执法行刑联动机制存在的问题,并借鉴美国药品行刑联动机制建设经验,提出修改《药品管理法》的建议。     

PRESTIGE OF JOURNALS IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE

The prestige of professional journals is an important element in the academic world because of the relationship of journal prestige to the careers of individuals and to the reputations of academic institutions. This study investigates the system of journal prestige in the field of criminology and criminal justice, using the ratings of professional journals obtained from a sample of respondents who are members of professional associations in criminology and criminal justice. The results show that there is a relatively high degree of agreement about the relative prestige of journals in the field, despite the fact that criminology and criminal justice is a multidisciplinary field involving professionals from a wide variety of occupational settings.     

论公安机关鉴定体制改革的方向———以犯罪现场勘查与刑事技术鉴定的区别为视角

犯罪现场勘查与刑事技术鉴定工作是案件侦查的起点和基础,在刑事侦查工作中扮演着重要的角色,然而从我国实际情况来看,＂自勘自鉴＂、＂自侦自鉴＂、＂勘鉴不分＂的现象非常普遍,这一点与我国《刑事诉讼法》的立法精神相违背,有碍司法公正和侦查工作的顺利进行。为此,必须厘清犯罪现场勘查与刑事技术鉴定的区别,健全犯罪现场勘查与刑事技术鉴定的工作体制,实行＂侦勘合一＂的工作机制,使公安机关的鉴定机构与侦查部门分离成为公安机关鉴定制度改革的方向。     

论监察调查中的非法证据排除

《中华人民共和国监察法》确认了监察机关依法收集的证据在刑事诉讼中可以作为证据使用的法律地位,同时规定“监察机关在收集、固定、审查、运用证据时,应当与刑事审判关于证据的要求和标准相一致,以非法方法收集的证据应当依法予以排除”,表明了监察机关对职务犯罪的调查所收集的证据必须符合证据裁判原则。随着中国特色社会主义法治进程的不断推进,不难预见,在今后监察委员会移送检察机关提起公诉的案件中,遇到被告人提出非法证据排除的案件可能会越来越多。为积极应对这一突出问题,本文就监察调查中排除非法证据的现实意义、法律适用、非法言词证据及非法实物证据排除规则进行阐述,进而提出有效应对举措,确保监察调查取得的证据符合刑事诉讼证据标准,实现监察调查与刑事司法有效衔接。     

涉案财物处置的行刑衔接

行政执法和刑事司法程序在涉案财物认定、程序性和实体性处置规则等方面存在一定区别,在行刑衔接过程中,对涉案财物的处理一般应遵循刑事优先原则。对于行政机关移送的案件,公安司法机关应根据行政机关处置涉案财物的进展分别处理。为进一步完善有关程序,应明确供违法犯罪所用之物的认定标准、统一涉案财物的实体处置措施,并填补对违法所得产生的孳息予以行政没收的漏洞。     

EQUITY IN CRIMINAL JUSTICE:

This research examines the punishment decisions of 166 respondents, 36 of whom are employed in criminal justice occupations. Comparison of the decisions of criminal justice respondents and non-criminal justice respondents provides a test of two constructs in equity theory: inequity between offenders and victim and inequity between offender and accomplice. Results strongly, support the first construct and equivocally support the second.     

论刑事被害人的诉讼地位、诉讼权利及其保障

被害人在刑事诉讼中的地位是刑事诉讼的重要问题 ,保护被害人 ,给予其恰如其份的诉讼地位和诉讼权利成为追求司法公正的重要组成部分。我国刑事诉讼法对被害人的诉讼地位和诉讼权利的重视应当肯定 ,但是在保护受害人合法权益方面仍有一些不周到之处 ,应当采取相应措施加以完善。     

专家参与刑事司法的多元功能及其体系化

从1979年刑事诉讼法颁布至今,专家参与我国刑事司法的制度功能变得开放而多元。专家制度功能的多元化,根源于刑事司法的三重逻辑:弥合法律人与专家之间知识鸿沟的“认知逻辑”;落实公检法机关“分工负责,互相配合,互相制约”原则的“权力逻辑”;保障当事人合法权益与实现控辩平等的“权利逻辑”。从结构主义与整体主义的视角看,当前,刑事专家制度存在明显的体系化缺陷,主要表现为专家制度过度权力化、专家制度功能尚未结构化、专家制度不够规范化。改进刑事专家制度,应当采取体系化路径:首先,将多元专家参与模式调整为鉴定人与专家辅助人二元专家模式;其次,彰显专家制度的“权利逻辑”,矫正过度权力化倾向;最后,构建系统化的专家制度,为专家服务刑事司法创造制度条件。     

论未成年人轻罪犯罪记录封存制度——我国新《刑事诉讼法》第275条之理解与适用

未成年人轻罪犯罪记录封存制度的适用对象除被判处五年有期徒刑以下刑罚的未成年犯外,未成年人相对不起诉和附条件不起诉记录封存也应参照适用,而且,从长远来看,应适用于所有未成年人;在法律效力上应严格限定但书中"国家规定"的范围,并协调与其他相关法律的关系;适用主体除公安机关、检察院、法院和未成年犯管教所外,还包括知晓未成年人犯罪记录的有关机关、单位以及当事人、辩护人、诉讼代理人和其他知晓其犯罪记录的个人。为充分发挥该制度的重要价值,应当将其"升级"为未成年人犯罪记录消灭制度。     

A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK FOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE PLANNING

This paper outlines a conceptual scheme for systematic analysis of the criminal justice policy-planning process. The major assumptions required to apply the concept of policy-planning in the substantive area of criminal justice are examined. Specification of critical aspects of the criminal justice system/environment relationship and elaboration of the roles played by various classes of key actors in relation to the need for, demand for, production of, and utilization of policy-planning analyses are central features of the analytic scheme.     

Criminal Mediation in Mainland China: A Leap from Judicial Endeavor to Legal Norm

The use of mediation in the public prosecution of criminal matters has had a nation-wide impact since being introduced by China’s Judiciary. After almost 10 years, mediation in criminal prosecution cases has, in 2012, now been adopted by the newly revised Criminal Procedure Law 2012 (NPC 2012). This paper examines the characteristics of Chinese criminal mediation, and its introduction and development, by analyzing the empirical data collected from the practice. The ineffectiveness of collateral civil proceedings to criminal procedure to compensate victims, the resulting complaints and petitions argued by them, and the need to resolve the disputes in a way that promotes social harmony, were seen as important reasons to bring criminal mediation practices to China. Varying from ‘western’ restorative justice practices, China’s criminal mediation is closely associated with China’s powerful state criminal justice apparatus, which itself is restricted by the rigidity of the law.     

略论《刑事诉讼法》修改之后鉴定制度的完善——根据司法鉴定的价值和特点进行的分析

我国《刑事诉讼法》修改之后,为促进和保障刑事司法公正,与司法鉴定相关的制度、程序需要进一步完善.应当基于司法鉴定作为证据的基本特点,着眼于保障当事人的权利和规制职权机关的权力,从诉讼程序、证据制度以及管理制度等各个方面,推动我国相关程序、制度的完善.     

略论《刑事诉讼法》的再修改

再次修改《刑事诉讼法》既是总结司法实践经验、实现我国刑事诉讼制度协调发展的需要,也是加强人权的程序保障、促进我国刑事诉讼制度民主化、国际化和法治化的需要;在修改过程中,应当正确处理好《宪法》与《刑事诉讼法》、惩罚犯罪与保护人权、司法公正与司法效率、借鉴国外先进经验与结合我国国情之间的关系;修改的基本内容应当包括加强对追诉权力的控制、辩护权利的保护、保障公正审判的权利以及健全程序侵权的救济机制四个方面。     

INTERORGANIZATIONAL UTILITY OF WELFARE STIGMA IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM*

The appropriation of “welfare stigma” or stereotypes about poor people's overreliance and abuse of public aid in two core criminal justice functions is examined: felony adjudication in a court system and space allocation in a jail. Through a comparative ethnographic study in which an abductive analysis of data (20 months of fieldwork) was used, we show that criminal justice gatekeepers utilize welfare stigma to create stricter eligibility criteria for due process in criminal courts and occupancy in jails. Specifically, the number of court appearances, motions, trials, jail beds, food, showers, and medical services is considered by professionals to be the benefits that individuals seek to access and abuse. Professionals view their role as preventing (rather than granting) access to these resources. The comparative nature of our data reveals that welfare stigma has interorganizational utility by serving two different organizational goals: It streamlines convictions in courts, which pulls defendants through adjudication, and conversely, it expands early release from jails, which pulls inmates out of the custody population. In the context of diminishing social safety nets, our findings have implications for understanding how discretion is exercised in an American criminal justice system increasingly tasked with the distribution of social services to the urban poor.     

Retrospection and perspective: Chinese criminal procedure law (1979–2009)

The Criminal Procedure Law was promulgated 30 years ago, which is an important starting point for the construction of Chinese Criminal Procedure Law system, and its first amendment in 1996 further adapted to the demand of democracy, the rule of law and social reforms, which might be viewed as a milestone in the history of Chinese criminal justice though the core issues here had not been thoroughly solved. Thereafter, three inherent defects remain in Chinese criminal justice, for which China has also taken initiatives to further amend the Criminal Procedure Law. However, there are various challenges and dilemmas in further amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law, including lack of a constitutional basis, lack of complementary judicial reforms, departmentalism in legislation and restraints of traditional ideas. The orientation of reforms shall be further improvement of the adversary system, focusing on complying with international conventions and coordinating with the results of the institutional reforms of justice in China.     

论我国刑事司法鉴定权配置的困境与突破

我国刑事司法鉴定权由公检法机关主导,当事人仅有申请补充鉴定和重新鉴定的权利。这种鉴定权配置方式导致刑事司法公正性不足、效率低下以及权威性缺失的困境。与我国刑事诉讼模式的转型格格不入。借鉴域外经验,我国刑事司法鉴定权配置应以公正高效权威为目标,赋予辩方司法鉴定启动权、保留侦控机关自行启动鉴定权、限制法官的鉴定启动权以及建立鉴定处分的司法审查制度,逐步形成与我国刑事诉讼模式相契合的刑事司法鉴定权配置方式。     

论强制医疗案件的集中管辖——基于A市审判实践的观察和思考

在现行强制医疗司法实践中,由于各省(市)对肇祸的精神病人多采取集中医疗,而司法机关则分散于各区县,导致司法机关为节约司法成本而有意无意地缩略了部分诉讼程序,使得被强制医疗人及其法定代理人的诉讼权利和实体权利均受到侵害。为改变此种现状,应借鉴行政案件、知识产权案件和特殊刑事案件的集中管辖制度,建立与集中医疗相对应的集中管辖制度即将全省(市)的强制医疗案件集中到接受医疗地的司法机关管辖,从而实现司法资源优化配置,降低司法成本;强化诉讼权利保障,体现程序公正;实现同案同判,维护实体公正;实现效率提升,确保及时审判;实现专业化审判,确保案件质量。为确保特殊案件得以公正处理,应设置集中管辖的例外制度;为保障当事人及其法定代理人对集中管辖的异议权,应赋予其上诉权。     

“只有被告人供述”案件司法证明的谬误与厘清

我国《刑事诉讼法》第55条规定之目的,在于改善司法机关依赖口供定罪的现状,从而避免刑讯逼供等非法取证行为的发生,真正实现保障人权的基本目标。但是实践中不仅存在仅凭口供定罪的情形,还存在通过异化口供形式或者形式化口供补强,以规避第55条约束的现象。异化的口供形式,本质上仍然是“被告人供述”;形式化的口供补强规则,是以“被告人供述”为中心形成虚假印证。考虑到《刑事诉讼法》的根本目标,应当对第55条进行实质解释,既不能通过异化口供来定案,也不能进行形式化口供补强,将口供作为定案的主要依据。换言之,应当不断降低口供在司法证明中的证明力,积极寻找其他客观性证据,并结合排除合理怀疑的证明要求,从而达到我国的刑事证明标准,才是《刑事诉讼法》第55条的合理适用。     

刑事诉讼制度的地方性试点改革

地方司法机关围绕刑事诉讼制度进行的试点改革,其兴起并趋于活跃不是偶然的,而是中国特有的刑事司法环境所形塑出来的多种因素与多重机制综合作用的结果。由于这些试点改革由地方司法机关主导,所以,它们在具体的实施中表现出了一些体现中国司法管理与司法制度的运行特点。实践中各种类型的试点改革共享类似的制度逻辑,具有共通的内在特质。它们最大的价值在于可以充当全国层面刑事诉讼制度改革的"实验室",为刑事诉讼立法提供实证依据与经验素材。作为一种高度技术化的法律改革活动,地方司法机关的试点改革存在诸多必须为我们所正视的技术缺陷。未来应该突破价值论的意识形态藩篱,采取有针对性的弥补措施,促进地方司法机关试点改革的发展。     

Witness involvement in the criminal justice system and intention to cooperate in future prosecutions

This study examined whether systems-related problems or relationships with criminal justice personnel were the more important factors associated with witness intention to cooperate in future prosecutions. Using correlation and regression analysis procedures it was determined thatfactors related to the responsiveness of criminal justice system personnel were significantly greater predictors than system-related factors of an intention to cooperate in the future. It was concluded that the responsiveness of personnel to a witness is a very important factor in the witness's formation of attitudes toward the criminal justice system and his or her participation in that system, and that the personnel in a prosecutor's office who interact with witnesses should be aware of the role they play in influencing these attitudes.