【作者】 葛琳；

【导师】 陈光中；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 将和解适用于刑事领域,特别是公诉案件当中在我国当前还是一种新的尝试。我国法律上有关刑事和解的内容只见于现行刑事诉讼法关于自诉案件和附带民事诉讼的规定。对于公诉案件我国禁止和解。在传统刑事法理论中,公诉权、审判权、刑罚权都是典型的公权力,刑事纠纷当事人以和解的方式解决刑事纠纷显然使原本垄断公诉案件处理的公权力受到了挑战,而在传统刑事法理论中,公权力是不可处分的,受此观念的影响,刑事和解目前仍存在许多争议。在司法实践中,以和解解决刑事纠纷的方式却以各种不同的形式存在着,在刑事诉讼领域展现出一种灵活而复杂的运作图景,有些做法尚未被纳入正式的法律轨道,但作为一种潜存于民间和具体司法过程中的刑事纠纷解决方式,刑事和解的存在有其必然性。本文所研究的刑事和解是指以协商合作形式恢复原有秩序的刑事纠纷解决方式,某些进入诉讼程序的刑事案件的被害人和加害人以赔偿、道歉等形式达成谅解后,国家专门机关不再追究加害人的刑事责任,或者对其从轻处罚的案件处理方式。本文以诉讼内的刑事和解为重点研究范围,系统论述了刑事和解的精神理念,理清了刑事和解的内涵与外延;回顾了刑事和解的历史轨迹,揭示了刑事和解兴衰变迁背后的规律;从不同学科的角度探究了刑事和解的理论依据,并探讨了刑事和解制度和理念对传统刑事法理论的冲击与互动,最后指出了刑事和解必备的制度要素,并按照这种应然标准描绘了今后的构建图景。本文共分导论、正文、结语三部分。导论刑罚之后又如何。导论主要从犯罪浪潮高涨、监狱人满为患、罪犯改造效果不容乐观的世界性难题入手,总结了我国刑事司法所面临的三大问题,指出正是基于对这些问题的关注,国外及我国学者开始对刑罚的作用和传统刑事司法的一元目的进行反思,从不同角度开出了多种药方,比如非刑罚化、轻刑化、监管制度改革、社区矫正、被害人国家补偿制度等等,刑事和解作为其中引人瞩目的一种,开始冲破刑事诉讼性质的传统定论为刑事法学者所关注和讨论。第一章刑事和解之基本理念。本章旨在界定刑事和解的具体内涵、性质、功能,并指出研究刑事和解的两个视角:刑事政策视角和民间法视角,在此基础上提出了刑事和解与传统刑事司法不同的三种正义观:合意正义、补偿正义和个案正义。第二章刑事和解之历史轨迹。本章回顾了刑事和解在人类社会从古至今的演变轨迹,并分节重点探讨了中国古代、近代的刑事和解制度和现代西方各国的刑事和解制度。通过回顾古今中外刑事和解的发展历史,揭示了刑事和解兴衰变迁背后的规律:刑事和解的衰落与复兴遵循了黑格尔提出的“正反合”规律。如果将人类史前阶段的主要纠纷解决方式——包括和解在内的私力救济视为正题,那么后来一统天下的审判-处刑方式就是反题,是对私力救济的否定,既抛弃了其缺点,也抛弃了优点。目前刑事和解的复兴是人类在反思审判-处刑方式的弊端的基础上的理性回归,是扬弃了缺点的共融与合作,也是一种制度走向理性和成熟的必经过程。第三章刑事和解之理论依据。本章重点分析不同视角或不同学科为刑事和解提供的理论依据,希望论证的是,刑事和解的产生不单纯源于某个学科的某种理论,或许是不同学科的合力才促成了刑事和解现象的发生。因此本章分别从政治哲学、经济学、心理学和不同文化观念的角度探寻了与刑事和解有关或可能有关的理论观点,从而为深入理解刑事和解奠定基础。第四章刑事和解与刑事法理论之互动。“互动”是指相互影响。刑事法理论中的某些理念促进了刑事和解的产生和发展,某些理念却成为了刑事和解发展的障碍。刑事和解成为有影响力的制度之后反过来必然对传统刑事法理论框架产生冲击。只有在理论上系统回应传统刑事法理论的挑战,整合有益的理论资源,形成自圆其说的制度体系,刑事和解才能真正登堂入室,被广泛接受。本章既介绍了犯罪学理论、刑法理论以及刑事诉讼法理论中与刑事和解渊源深厚的理念与制度,例如犯罪学中的标签理论、犯罪类型学的发展等,也回应了与刑事和解有所龃龉的理论观点,例如罪刑法定原则、社会危害性理论等,还重点阐述了刑事和解制度与刑事诉讼目的、诉讼模式、诉讼分流、诉权理论之间的相互影响。第五章刑事和解之制度要素。本章重点探讨构建刑事和解制度必备制度要素,包括参与主体、适用条件、案件范围、责任形式、和解协议等五个方面。本章的特点是以案例解析形式对比中外对这些制度要素的不同观点,探讨刑事和解的应然状态,为后文的建构做理论上的铺垫。第六章刑事和解之建构图景。本章是本文篇幅最长的一章。首先总结了刑事和解在我国各试点地区的状况和特点,既肯定了积极效果,也指出了实践中存在的阻力,进而重点阐述刑事和解在我国之构建,包括体系构建、模式选择、具体诉讼阶段的刑事和解以及保障机制四个部分,希望通过具体的制度设置、细化的问题剖析和保障机制的周密建构描画出刑事和解制度在我国的实现图景。结语从刑事和解看中国未来刑事法的走向。结语将对刑事和解制度的具象思考上升为对中国未来刑事法走向的理性预期,指出了中国未来刑事法的两大走向:在刑事诉讼阶段,刑事案件的分流机制的多元化、审前化;在刑罚的适用和执行方面,对犯罪的处遇的轻缓化、社会化,并对刑事和解进行最后的理论总结。更多还原

【Abstract】 It is an new practice to apply reconciliation to criminal cases, especially in the public prosecution cases in China. The current laws allow reconciliation only in private actions and incidental civil actions, and reconciliation is forbidden in public prosecution cases. According to traditional criminal law theory, the parties settling the criminal disputes with reconciliation means challenging the public powers’exclusive control over the criminal disputes settlements, because public powers such as prosecution, jurisdiction can not be disposed by private persons in traditional criminal law theory. Consequently, there are many different opinions in criminal reconciliation. In judicial practice field, the forms of criminal reconciliation appear complex and flexible, some of which have not been accepted by law, but it is inevasible that criminal reconciliation flourish in civil life and judicial practice. Criminal reconciliation in this dissertation is a kind of criminal disputes settlement: offenders try to obtain the victims’forgiveness by compensation, apology and other forms, and the authorities may not investigate the offenders or give them lenient punishments. This dissertation focused on criminal reconciliation in formal criminal procedure, compared the related concepts, discussed the spirit of criminal reconciliation, looking back the history of the development of criminal reconciliation, discussed the rule dominating reconciliation’s whirligiging in history. Then, this dissertation discussed the theoretical bases of criminal reconciliation from different angle of view and the interaction between criminal reconciliation and the criminal theory. Finally, this dissertation pointed the elements of criminal reconciliation and gave suggestions on how to construct the criminal reconciliation system .The paper is divided into three parts: Introduction; Straight matter(six chapters); Perspective.Introduction. How after penalty? This part started with the worldwide problems such as the crime waves on the upsurge, overcrowding prison, the disillusionary effect of criminals corrections and so on, and concluded the three problems facing on the Chinese criminal procedural system. To solve these problems, Chinese and foreign scholars begin to rethink the role of penalty and the simplex purpose of the criminal justice, and give many suggestions, including depenalization, light punishment, correction system reform, community corrections, establishing national compensation system for victims of crime, etc. Criminal reconciliation begins to be focused on as an attentioned countermeasure.Chapter 1. The concept of criminal reconciliation. This chapter attempted to define the connotation, features, characters, functions, and pointed out the two angles of view: criminal policy and folk law, on which brought forward the three viewpoints about justice different from traditional criminal justice: justice of agreement, justice of compensation and justice of cases.Chapter 2. The history of criminal reconciliation. This chapter looked back the history of the development of criminal reconciliation, focused on criminal reconciliation in ancient China, latter-day China and in modern westworld. On this basis, the rule dominating reconciliation’s whirligiging in history was discussed. The development of criminal reconciliation can be explained by the rule of“thesis-antithesis-synthesis”found by Hegel. If private remedy including reconciliation can be looked as a obverse process of criminal disputes settlement, the Trial-Penalty which is in popular in the world afterward can be looked as the reverse of the private remedy. The revival of criminal reconciliation in modern time can be looked as the combination of the above two poles, through which a system goes toward rationality and maturity.Chapter 3. Theoretical bases of criminal reconciliation. Criminal reconciliation does not come from single theory or single discipline, on the contrary, it is a fruit from different theories and disciplines combining. Consequently, many viewpoints related to criminal reconciliation in philosophy, economics, psychology and culture were discussed in this chapter.Chapter 4. Interaction between criminal reconciliation and criminal theory. Some criminal theories supported the development of criminal reconciliation and some became its theoretical obstacle. At the same time, criminal reconciliation in turn affected the development of criminal theory. To be accepted widely, criminal reconciliation should justify itself. This chapter introduced the theories related criminal reconciliation in criminology, criminal law and criminal procedural law, such as label theory and crime typology and also answered some adverse arguments, then expatiated the interaction between criminal reconciliation and the propose, the mode and the division system of the criminal procedure.Chapter 5. Elements of criminal reconciliation. This chapter discussed the elements of criminal reconciliation, including its subjects, objects, application conditions, application scope, forms of the responsibility and reconciliation agreement. Many cases were displayed to compare the different opinions about these elements between China and westworld in this chapter, in order to do groundwork for the next chapter.Chapter 6. Construction prospect of criminal reconciliation. This chapter is the longest one in this paper. The status and features of the trial locations applying criminal reconciliation were firstly concluded, discussing the positive effects and the obstacles. Then suggestions were given on how to construct the criminal reconciliation system in China, including system construction, mode selection, criminal reconciliation in stage of the proceedings and the safeguard mechanism. The purpose of this chapter is to describe the construction prospect of criminal reconciliation in China.Perspective. Perspective tried to give anticipations for the trend of the Chinese criminal law through the analysis of criminal reconciliation. Two trends is the conclusion: in criminal procedure law, the division system of the criminal procedure tends to diverse and pretrial; in criminal law, penalty tends to moderate and the treatments to crimes tends to socialized. Criminal reconciliation was finally concluded.更多还原