刑事错案纠正的偶然性

我国设置审判监督程序的目的在于尽可能及时、有效地发现、纠正错案,弱化错案的消极影响,然而事实证明,依靠申诉启动再审程序的结构性缺陷、司法机关自主纠错的动力受限、司法人员主动纠错的内在症结导致审判监督程序四种救济途径在纠错方面的整体性失灵,引发错案纠正呈现为一种偶然性的现实,违背立法对审判监督程序的价值期待。     

司法价值视阈下的审判公开

司法价值关乎具体的司法动向和司法目标的实现。在深化司法体制改革过程中,确立了司法公正、司法效率、司法民主的价值取向。审判公开在促进司法公正,提高司法效率,保障司法民主方面,彰显了司法价值。     

论我国上诉不加刑原则的完善

上诉不加刑原则是世界各国通用的原则 ,我国的上诉不加刑在司法实践中与审判监督程序相悖 ,从而淡化了被告人的上诉权 ,使上诉不加刑原则流于形式。为此 ,首先必须完善审判监督程序 ,实行有条件的不加刑 ;其次 ,刑事诉讼法应赋予公诉案件被害人的上诉权 ,平衡于被告人的上诉权。     

刑事缺席审判制度在中国的建构

刑事缺席审判的方式,有其存在的现实合理性和价值基础,应当合理权衡公正与效率的价值需求,充分考虑缺席审判的程序正当性。在我们的刑事诉讼中,如果能够合理设计缺席审判制度并有效规范它的运作,将会解决当前刑事诉讼中存在的某些相关问题。在我国确立缺席审判制度,必须明确缺席审判的适用范围,在合理控制缺席审判的发生条件的基础上,充分考虑制度设置的合理性,使缺席审判的运作合乎程序正当性的要求。     

The `Ideal' Victim v Successful Rape Complainants: Not What You Might Expect

This article proposes that feminist legal critics need to be able to explain how some rape cases succeed in securing convictions. The means by which rape cases are routinely disqualified in the criminal justice system have received widespread attention. It is well established in feminist legal critique that female complainants are discredited if they fail to conform to an archaic stereotype of the genuine or ‘real’ rape victim. This victim is not only morally and sexually virtuous she is also cautious, unprovocative, and consistent. Defence tactics for discrediting rape testimony involve exposing the complainant's alleged failure to comply with the sexual and behavioural standards of the normative victim. This understanding of how rape complain(an)ts are disqualified is not predictive, however, of the complainants whose cases succeed in securing convictions. This article reviews some successful Australian rape cases and considers the ways in which they disturb feminist understandings of how rape complaints are discredited in the criminal justice system. It proposes that recent research analysing the discourse of rape trials provides a way of explaining the apparent discrepancies between the ‘ideal’ rape victim and successful complainants. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

试论在刑事审判中以“参照”方式适用法律

在现行刑法概括性、抽象性的条款较多和法律解释不够系统完善、且滞后的状况下,以"参照"方式适用法律显得十分必要;其目的符合刑法基本原则和量刑一般原则,其本质是法官自由裁量权的具体运用;但需要加以合理规范。     

The Investigation and Trial of Criminal Offences in the New Century – The Need for a Radical Change

This is the text of the Liverpool Law Review Annual Lecture 1999. Mr. Justice Hooper speaks about the need for a radical reform of the practices and procedures and rules of evidence in the Criminal Courts in England and Wales. Radical reform is needed at all stages of the process including the investigation stage, the pre-trial stage and at the trial itself. Substantive law reform is also long overdue and there is a real need to consider a new approach by the adoption of a comprehensive criminal code. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

利与弊：评公诉人“一身兼二职”

公诉人在庭审中"一身兼二职"是司法实践的一贯做法,但从立法修改的精神看,公诉人的这种做法不仅没有必要,而且在具体操作中困难重重。因此,为实现司法公正,这种"一身兼二职"的做法亟待改变。     

是否应当回归“马锡五”——兼评司法改革的前进方向

作为特殊历史时期产物的马锡五审判方式在当代的复兴有其深刻的原因。由于其自身的历史条件性和司法改革的要求,马锡五审判方式已不再具有现实的适用可能,然而其内在价值却对当前的司法改革有着很重要的意义。在马锡五审判方式回归的这个现象背后,还隐藏着司法职业化和司法大众化之争。当前司法所存在的问题并不是司法职业化所造成,司法改革依然应当坚持职业化的方向。     

证明过程的成本分析——以当事人主义刑事审判模式为对象

刑事审判证明过程分为证据采集、证据审查和证据认定三个阶段。证据采集是发现事实,产生生产成本;证据审查是沟通事实,产生交易成本;证据认定是确认事实,产生行为成本。证据制度的目标是准确、公正和效率,路径是实现成本平衡且最小化。相对于职权主义,当事人主义刑事审判模式证明程序具有成本优势。