起诉便宜主义及其在我国的适用

【作者】 史丽萍；

【导师】 夏锦文；

【作者基本信息】 南京师范大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2008， 硕士

【摘要】 起诉便宜主义现已被世界各国所接受,但由于历史与现实的原因,起诉便宜主义在不同国家又有不同的发展路径:日本是实施起诉便宜主义较典型的国家,起诉便宜主义在日本被称为起诉犹豫处分;德国是最早提出起诉便宜主义的国家,而且德国刑事诉讼法对于起诉便宜主义的规定非常复杂和多样化;英国将起诉便宜主义作为其起诉的基本立场,检察官裁量的依据是“公共利益检验”;美国的起诉便宜主义则主要通过辩诉交易来体现。起诉便宜主义具有深厚的法理基础,体现了刑法谦抑性之要求、刑罚预防目的之需要、刑事诉讼安全之选择以及对公正和效率价值的权衡考虑。起诉便宜主义在我国的主要实践形式有酌定不起诉制度、暂缓起诉制度和公诉撤回起诉制度,这些制度都赋予了检察机关有限的自由裁量权,是对起诉便宜主义积极价值的认肯,但在具体的制度设计上还有这样那样的缺陷,有些制度适用范围不够妥当、操作缺乏透明度、救济机制不合理,有些制度缺乏法律依据、法律性质不明确等。因此应当充分学习和借鉴国外优秀的制度和成功的做法,并结合我国的实际,进一步完善相关的制度,以使起诉便宜主义在我国发挥更大的积极作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 Nowadays, doctrine of free evaluation prosecution has been accepted bymost countries in the world. However, due to historical and practical reasons,this doctrine has different development paths in different countries: Japan is atypical country that implements this doctrine, which is called suspendedprosecution; Germany is the first country that proposed doctrine of freeevaluation prosecution, moreover, it has given complex and diverse provisionson this doctrine in its criminal procedure law; Britain considers this doctrine asthe basic standpoint of prosecution, its prosecutors make judgement on thebasis of "public interests inspection"; the United States embodies this doctrinemainly by plea bargaining. This doctrine has a profound theoretical basis,presenting the requirements of the restraining principle of Criminal Law andthe preventive aim of penalty. It is a good choice to guarantee the safety of thecriminal prosecution as well as a balance between equity and efficiency. InChina, the doctrine of free evaluation prosecution mainly embodies in thesystem of free evaluation non-prosecution, the system of prosecutionpostponement and the system of public prosecution withdrawal. Thesesystems, which are recognition to the positive value of this doctrine, haveendowed the prosecutors with limited right of discretion. Although there aresome kinds of defects in detailed systems, for example, the practice scope isnot appropriate, the operation is lack of transparency, and the succor system isunreasonable in some systems; Some systems are lack of legal basis, withambiguous legal nature. Therefore, we should fully learn from the outstandingsystem and operation of foreign countries, while at the same time, withconsider to China’s actual situation, go further in improving the relevantsystems to enable the doctrine of free evaluation prosecution to play a moreactive role in China.更多还原