检察官学院的目标定位及其实现

检察官学院作为检察机关培养新世纪人才的重要基地,需要在适应司法体制改革和工作机制改革形势下找准培训目标的定位,以此进行教学现代化改革,为加快培养检察机关各类人才搭建一个科学的平台.     

Justice institutions in autocracies: a framework for analysis

What role do justice institutions play in autocracies? We bring together the literatures on authoritarian political institutions and on judicial politics to create a framework to answer this question. We start from the premise that autocrats use justice institutions to deal with the fundamental problems of control and power-sharing. Unpacking “justice institutions” we argue that prosecutors and ordinary courts can serve, respectively, as “top-down” and “bottom-up” monitoring and information-gathering mechanisms helping the dictator in the choice between repression and cooptation. We also argue that representation in the Supreme Court and special jurisdictions enables the dictator and his ruling coalition to solve intra-elite conflicts facilitating coordination. We provide several examples from Mexico under the hegemonic system of the PRI and of Spain under Francisco Franco, as well as punctual illustrations from other countries around the world. We conclude by reflecting on some of the potential consequences of this usage of justice institutions under autocracy for democratization.     

附条件逮捕制度的构建

我国现行的侦查和起诉关系,导致侦查取证不到位,诉讼效率低下。应在现行法律框架内,建立附条件逮捕制度来完善我国的侦查和起诉关系,强化检察机关对侦查机关取证工作的引导,适应现实中逮捕标准过高和犯罪形势复杂等问题,提高审前追诉程序的运作效率,在有效追诉犯罪的同时积极保障人权。     

FEDERAL SENTENCING AS A COMPLEX COLLABORATIVE PROCESS: JUDGES,PROSECUTORS, JUDGE–PROSECUTOR DYADS,AND DISPARITY IN SENTENCING

Investigations of how criminal justice actors contribute to variation in sentencing typically focus on the role played by the judge. We argue that sentencing should be viewed as a collaborative process involving actors other than the judge and that the role of the prosecutor is particularly salient. We also contend that the courtroom workgroup literature has suggested that sentences may vary depending on the particular judge and prosecutor to whom the case is assigned. By using a unique data set from three U.S. district courts (N = 2,686) that identifies both the judge and the prosecutor handling the case, we examine how the judge, the prosecutor, and the judge–prosecutor dyad contribute to variance in offender sentences. We do this by employing cross‐classified random‐effects models to estimate the variance components associated with judges, prosecutors, and judge–prosecutor interactions. The results indicate that disparity attributable to the prosecutor is larger than disparity from the judge. Moreover, the role that the judge plays is moderated by the prosecutor to whom the case is assigned, as the judge–prosecutor effect is consistently larger than other random effects across the models. We also find that results vary by judicial district.     

论我国经济公益诉讼制度之构建

经济公益诉讼作为一项对传统诉讼法进行理念性更新和突破的新型诉讼,排除了传统的将原告资格限制在须与本案有直接利害关系的原告适格理论的阻却。当社会经济公益遭受侵害或有侵害之虞时,授权检察机关或任何公民和组织均可为维护社会经济公益而向法院提起诉讼。     

民事检察建议存在的问题及完善路径

修改后的民事诉讼法将民事检察建议作为检察机关新的监督方式,改变了检察机关以往单一的抗诉监督模式,形成了抗诉、纠正违法的检察建议、再审检察建议并重的多元化监督模式,同时也拓宽了民事检察监督范围,民事检察监督由审判监督拓展至民事诉讼监督。但民事检察建议仍存在法律规定模糊、刚性监督效力不足、重视程度不够及运行程序混乱等问题,需要进一步完善以充分发挥民事检察建议的制度作用。     

公诉环节非法证据排除问题浅析

公诉人在非法证据排除工作中应确立公平公正的中立观念,增强诉前审查非法证据的自主性,对侦查人员出具的取证情况说明要具体分析,坚决排除非法证据。完善非法证据排除的相关措施有：设立沉默权或律师在场制度;增强技术手段,提高侦查能力;对社会影响重大的案件实行听证制度。     

Calling Your Bluff: How Prosecutors and Defense Attorneys Adapt Plea Bargaining Strategies to Increased Formalization

This ethnographic work examines the inner workings of a highly formalized plea bargaining unit in a large urban prosecutor’s office from the lawyers’ point of view. Observations of forty two plea negotiations between prosecutors and defense attorneys along with both formal and informal interviews reveal how the legal actors adapt to institutional rules in the pursuit of the both efficiency and justice. In the face of ever increasing prosecutorial power, defense attorneys find ways to equalize the balance when cases do not fit the “normal crimes” model. Examination of negotiating strategy and discourse give further insight into whether prosecutors and defense attorneys behave differently under highly rationalized systems of plea‐bargaining compared with traditional models previously studied.     

论检警机关侦查权力的配置——以我国与英、法、德比较分析为视角

侦查学属于法学门类之下的一个学科,法学界将侦查的研究分为两种：一种是着眼于诉讼论角度研究,另一种着眼于方法论的角度研究。前者是基于诉讼程序、规范制度及相关侦查理论,后者是基于实务层面,主要是指侦查实践、侦查方法,为了实现侦查破案的目的而采取的一系列侦查手段方法和措施（如逮捕、搜查、拘留等强制性措施）。本文试从诉讼论的角度展开分析,采用了＂比较分析研究＂的方法介绍英、法、德检警机关侦查权力的配置及其相互之间的关系,再结合中国目前的侦查权力配置,将国内和国外两者进行比较,分析中国侦查法制存在的弊端,并大胆尝试从国外法中吸收优势进行补益,以期在该领域能有进一步的探索。     

我国现有诉讼结构中检察与警察的权限之争

侦查权与公诉权如何分配和协调,关系到刑事诉讼的结构和运作模式。就其本质来说,乃是检察权与警察权的分工与协作问题。本文从我国检察与警察权限的现况与争执出发,归纳了现有检察与警察权限争执的问题点,并通过比较国外检察与警察关系模式提出我国应有的选择方向。