【作者】 王永燕；

【导师】 王新清；

【作者基本信息】 中国人民大学 ， 诉讼法， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 在刑事司法中更多的关注被害人的利益,真正还原其在刑事诉讼中的主体地位,同时又实现犯罪人复归社会的目的,已成为当代刑事司法改革的主题。世界各国在对传统刑事司法模式的诸多弊端进行反思和批判的基础上,形成并发展了应对犯罪和被害的完全不同的范式,即刑事和解。刑事和解以恢复正义为核心价值理念,以对话和协商为主要程序特点,在短短二、三十年时间里,已发展成为一股国际潮流。在将刑事和解作为一种年轻的制度进行研究和制度定型的同时,人们也从理性的层面对这种制度发生的相关思想文化背景进行溯源,从而在构建制度时真正体现社会和司法实践的要求,忠于刑事和解模式的理念初衷。本文中笔者正是基于此种考虑,在刑事和解制度于我国还没有定型的情况下,立足于国外刑事和解制度构建的成功经验及我国现实的社会背景及司法现状,探索我国刑事和解制度生存的现实土壤和发展方向,以期有助于构建中国特色的刑事和解制度。具体而言,本文分为以下三个部分:第一部分,刑事和解的缘起。论述了刑事和解作为一种制度兴起后,在国外的相关实践。通过对几个典型国家和解制度的分析,总结出了其在程序设计和价值追求上的相似之处,得出刑事和解制度已经成为现代国际司法改革的焦点之一,并由此引出对这样一种获得世界各国普遍认同,且在实践中极富生命力的制度产生背后之思想文化背景的探究。其后,通过对此背景的分析,揭示了刑事和解制度产生的思想文化根源。第二部分,刑事和解的理性分析。在此部分中,通过对刑事和解制度概念、理论基础和价值理念这三方面的解构和分析,为下文中国刑事和解制度的构建进一步打下基础。首先在刑事和解的概念辨析中介绍了国际上通行的关于刑事和解概念的描述,并进一步分析了刑事和解的本质——“一种刑事契约”。为了使刑事和解这种制度在概念上更加明确,笔者又分析了其与几个易混淆的制度之间的区别,为以后实践中的制度构建在理论上扫清障碍。其次介绍了刑事和解产生的理论基础,此为任何一种制度存在和发展之根基,因此亦是对刑事和解进行理性分析时所不可或缺的研究内容。最后,刑事和解的价值,此也正是刑事和解制度存在的意义之所在。一是对正义的恢复。传统刑事司法立基的报应正义强调惩罚,而刑事和解立基的恢复正义强调复原,从报应正义到恢复正义,体现了理念从国家本位到个人本位的变化。二是司法效益的提升。刑事和解体现了法经济学的司法效益观,以效益最大化为价值理念,在社会整体利益和为追求这一利益所付出的司法成本之间进行衡量和取舍,最终形成了一种节约社会资源、提升司法效益又兼顾个案公平的有益司法模式。三是利益的共赢。正是这一价值的存在,为推动这种司法模式的发展提供了最主要的动力。实行刑事和解制度给加害人、被害人和司法机关三方带来的利益诱惑,成为其得到认可并有效运转的关键。第三部分,刑事和解制度在中国的构建。这一部分是文章的重点,也是写作目的之所在。一种制度于一国构建之前,对于其可行性和必要性的考察是不可或缺的,而且这种考察必须建立在对国家文化、制度深入了解的基础之上,只有这样才能做出符合本国国情的最佳选择。正是出于此种考虑,笔者从中国的文化传统、现行司法制度和我国宽严相济的刑事政策三个方面对刑事和解制度在中国构建的可行性进行了分析;并从中国社会转型时期及构建和谐社会的需要、被害人犯罪人的现实需求利益保护等角度阐述了刑事和解制度在中国构建的必要性。在对刑事和解于中国构建的制度设计上,笔者从刑事和解的模式、适用条件、案件范围、适用阶段、效力、主体、时限等方面进行了详细的论述。其中借鉴了国外的相关经验,发现了国外刑事和解的成功实践中于中国现实国情不符合,因此不宜适用的情况,亦在一些制度构建的具体方面提出了自己的一些想法。最后得出结论:我国已经在刑事和解领域做出了一些有益尝试,这些尝试以及伴随着这些尝试的学术研究在一定程度上是推行刑事和解的有效途径。但是我们也应意识到,如果不顾我国特殊的法律价值观念、社会环境等本土因素而一味的将刑事和解制度引入我国,不仅不能发挥刑事和解在西方各国所发挥的有益功能,反而会导致司法制度的混乱。因此,对于刑事和解制度的构建应在充分研究国情的基础上慎重和缓行。目前,除了刑事自诉中的和解,我们可以先在公诉中适用不起诉、暂缓起诉、缓刑、减刑、假释制度的较轻的刑事案件,以及实践中已经形成和解传统的案件中植入刑事和解的理论与合理成分,使民众对刑事和解的理念和价值逐渐熟悉和认知,然后在社会观念和相关制度比较成熟的情况下全面推行。更多还原

【Abstract】 Giving more attention to victim’s interests in criminal justice, recovering the subjective position of victim in criminal procedure and realizing the criminal recovery have become a theme of current criminal justice reform. Because of so many disadvantages of the traditional criminal justice system, a different paradigm which is called Victim-Offender Reconciliation (VOR for short) for understanding and responding to issues of crime and justice has developed among every country. Victim-Offender reconciliation takes restorative justice as it’s core value idea and takes dialogue and negotiation as it’s main procedure feature Now Victim-Offender Reconciliation has already developed becoming international tidal current in the latest twenty or thirty years. When study on and Stereotype Victim-Offender Reconciliation as a new-emerging institution, we also track down the origin of the System’s emergence which is companied with thought and cultural factor base on the rational level. Only in this way, can we embody the requirement of practice in society and judicature, and faithful to the original intention of Victim-Offender reconciliation. Because all of above , this article stand on the successful experiences of other countries in the Construction of VOR and the underground of our country as well as judicial practice; explore the existing condition and development direction of VOR. Hope that all of these efforts can be helpful to construct Victim-Offender Reconciliation with Chinese characteristics .To be specific, this article is divided into three parts.Part one, emergence of Victim-Offender Reconciliation. In this part, author discusses the practice of VOR in other countries after it’s rising as a system. Pass the analysis to VOR of representative several countries, author also sum up out the similarity that VOR has run after in value seeking and procedure design, and reach a conclusion that VOR has already became one of the focal point of modern international judicial reform. And draw forth from this, gain to such one kind universal identity of all the countries in the world, system thought culture of producing the back being hit by extremely rich life-force in practice background exploration. Then, have passed the analysis to this background, revealing the thought culture that VOR produces origin.Part two, rational analysis for Victim-Offender Reconciliation. Author discusses the relevant practice in abroad of VOR, after it’s rising. The article sum up the similarities both on the procedure design and value seeking of VOR, by analyzing VOR of several typical countries. The article also reaches the conclusion that Victim-Offender Reconciliation already became one focal points of modern international judicial reform. Firstly, the concept in VOR has discriminated description being hit by the VOR concept having introduced that the international mounts current relating to, and has analyzed the VOR nature--a kind of criminal contract further. This system further has made clear that for using VOR on the concept , the author has analyzed the differences between VOR and other systems which easy to confuse with VOR , has built build for the hereafter in system in practice in clearing away obstacles theoretically. Secondly, having introduced that the theoretical foundation of the creation of VOR, this is basis of there existing in any kind of system and development, is also what can not be short of research content when carrying out reason analysis on criminal compromise. Finally, is the value of Victim-Offender Reconciliation. This is also exactly the key significance that VOR there exists in system.Part three, construction of Victim-Offender Reconciliation in China. This part is the key of the passage as well as the purpose. Before one system is established in a country, an investigation which bases on a deep understanding of the country’s culture and system into its feasibility and necessity is pre-requisite, and only by this way can we make the best choice tally with the situation of the country. Taking those into consideration, the writer analyzes the feasibility of establishing Victim-Offender Reconciliation in China on the following three aspects: China’s cultural traditions, the active judicial system, and our criminal policy including both loose and severe parts. Considering the necessity of constructing a harmonious society during the time of social transformation and the protection of criminals and victims’benefits, the writer expatiate the necessity of constructing Victim-Offender Reconciliation. The writer presents detailed dissertation which contains the mould, applicable conditions, scope of the case, applicable phases, efficiency, subjects, time-limit of Victim-Offender Reconciliation as with the design of constructing the system in China. We come up with our own thoughts on specific points of the construction because we find those successful cases of foreign countries don’t go with the situation of China when we are using foreign countries’correlative experience for reference. Eventually we come to a conclusion: we have made some helpful attempts in the field of Victim-Offender Reconciliation, which efficiently carry out penal pacification system by a certain extent together with those academic research chaperonage. On the other way we are supposed to have the awareness that if we blindly set up Victim-Offender Reconciliation system in China but regardless of our special law values, social environment and other local elements, it will leads to the confusion of judiciary system rather than those helpful functions it exerts in western countries. Therefore, the structure to Victim-Offender Reconciliation builds the upper prudent basis practice responding to the national conditions studying sufficiently.更多还原