从恢复性司法论我国“和解制度的刑事化”

“恢复性司法”是西方国家的一项刑事司法制度,它的价值在于通过犯罪人、被害人及其他主体之间积极主动的沟通和交流,让犯罪人有机会通过积极的、负责任的行为尽快改过自新、融入社会,同时使得被害人因犯罪所造成的物质、精神损失得到有效的补偿,使被害人受犯罪影响的生活能够尽快地恢复常态,最大限度地保护被害人的合法权益。我国应借鉴其合理之处,构建我国的刑事和解制度。     

后现代、刑事和解及公共政策

＂后现代＂是对肇始于启蒙时代,以总体性思维和理性主义为标志的＂现代＂的反思和反动。刑事和解则是多元视角中的一种平等对话机制,和后现代有着天然的联系。后现代以公共政策为中介,对刑事和解进行自我限以求在国家刑法主导,刑罚在场的情况下实现和解目标。中国刑法应当认真面对后现代思潮,使刑法呈现出人文学科应有的风貌,并积极促进刑法理论变革以回应社会实践之需要。     

税务和解的正当性分析

税务和解现象之出现,缘于税务确认、税务处罚和税务诉讼过程中特定法律事实之缺失,其具有普遍性;税务事实之复杂性和税务实践之限制性的客观矛盾构成了税务和解的正当性基础;协商民主论、税收债法论以及既有执法领域的和解操作分别为税务和解提供了理论支撑和实践借鉴;税务和解的制度化可以消弭这一现象本身的异化倾向,从而实现税务和解在我国的正当化。     

侦查阶段的刑事和解一些问题的分析

公安机关侦查阶段的刑事和解,存在着可能影响司法公正的因素。一方面,辩护律师参与刑事和解时间有限制,在侦查阶段接触到证据,这与刑诉法规定相冲突;另一方面,刑事和解的量刑奖赏对未成年被追诉人吸引力不足。此外,在侦查阶段达成刑事和解的,法律没有规定侦查人员是否可以撤销案件。答案应当是肯定的,但应限于提请批捕之前。建议区分参与诉讼的辩护律师与参与侦查阶段刑事和解的律师,以兼顾对被追诉人和侦查机关的公平对待。公安机关发挥群众力量事先进行民间调解、感化被害人,可以推进刑事和解实现。     

论多元化纠纷解决机制范围内的刑事和解制度

刑事和解理论在司法实践中的广泛应用,对于建立多元化的社会矛盾纠纷解决机制具有积极意义。我国有必要引入刑事和解制度,但应当予以本土化的设计,以利于该制度在我国的发展。     

我国刑事和解制度初探——以和谐社会为语境

刑事和解制度在英美法系国家已经比较成熟,但在我国还一直停留在尝试阶段。在构建社会主义和谐社会的大背景下,作为一种解决纠纷的机制,我国有必要引进,用于解决那些比较轻微的刑事案件,恢复被破坏的社会关系,缓和双方当事人之间的紧张关系等,达到社会的真正和谐,构建社会主义和谐社会。目前,刑事和解制度在我国已经有了生存的土壤,北京、湖南等地的司法机关也做了积极的实践,因此,在构建社会主义和谐社会的环境下建立刑事和解制度是可行之策。     

修复性司法理论与检察工作实践——以构建和谐社会为视角

修复性司法（Restorative jusfice）理论的提出及实践,虽然不过三十年,却以其崭新的法治理念和创新的司法模式,赢得了世界各国的广泛关注。与传统的报应性司法或者矫正性司法相对应,修复性司法更加注重保护被害人的合法权益,更加强调当事人与社区的参与,更加强调社区及人际关系的和谐。该理论对于修正传统型司法的弊端,顺应和谐型社会的要求,具有很强的现实意义。借鉴和吸纳修复性司法的合理内核,反思和矫正传统型司法在实践中的不足,全面推进检察工作的科学发展,是当前检察理论研究工作面临的一个重大课题。     

National unity and reconciliation in Rwanda: A flawed approach?

This article examines the Rwandan government's national unity and reconciliation policy and one of its key elements, the National Unity and Reconciliation Commission (NURC). It contends that while the NURC potentially represents an innovative model that other post-conflict societies could adapt and use, the central premise on which both the commission and the government's broader national unity and reconciliation policy are based is critically flawed. The unity that they are endeavouring to achieve, as a vehicle for reconciliation, relies upon a negation of ethnicity – a core component of the 1994 genocide – and hence does not allow for an open and honest engagement with the past. The problem is further compounded by the government's attitude towards the prosecution of crimes committed by the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), which not only demonstrates that ethnicity remains highly significant but also underscores the incomplete and partial way in which the past is being addressed.     

INTEREST IN MARITAL RECONCILIATION AMONG DIVORCING PARENTS

This study offers the first research data on the interest of divorcing parents in marital reconciliation. A sample of 2,484 divorcing parents was surveyed after taking required parenting classes. They were asked about whether they believed their marriage could still be saved with hard work, and about their interest in reconciliation services. About 1 in 4 individual parents indicated some belief that their marriage could still be saved, and in about 1 in 9 matched couples both partners did. As for interest in reconciliation services, about 3 in 10 individuals indicated potential interest. In a sub‐sample of 329 matched couples, about 1 in 3 couples had one partner interested but not the other, and in 1 in 10 couples both partners were interested in reconciliation services. Findings were consistent across most demographic and marital factors. The only strong predictors of reconciliation interest were gender, with males being more interested than females, and initiator status, with far greater interest among those whose partner initiated the divorce. These findings are discussed in terms of attachment theory and future prospects of divorce services.     

恢复性司法“中国化”之制度抗衡问题研究

就被害人、犯罪人利益保护而言,无论是附带民事诉讼制度、还是刑事被害人补偿制度抑或是刑事和解制度、非刑罚处罚方法,它们都远不如恢复性司法那么周详;就提高诉讼效率而言,刑事简易程序功不可没,但已无拓展的空间,亟须恢复性司法的加盟。