| 田源.刑事和解适用的阻却因素与现实进路——以2013—2015年S省M区法院公诉案件审理情况为分析样本[J].,2016,17(4):76-81 |
| 刑事和解适用的阻却因素与现实进路——以2013—2015年S省M区法院公诉案件审理情况为分析样本 |
| Problems and Suggestions on the Application of Criminal Reconciliations |
| 投稿时间：2016-04-15 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 刑事和解 公诉案件 法律适用 主导机关 |
| English Keywords:Criminal Reconciliation Public Prosecution Case Problem of Application Leading Agency |
| Fund Project: |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 945 |
| 全文下载次数: 634 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 通过对S省M区法院2013-2015年公诉案件审理情况的实证分析,查找出可适用刑事和解但未适用的案件比例较大、刑事和解适用的成功率不高、适用和解的案件类型相对单一等现实问题。其原因在于刑事和解主导机关的不明确,立法规范的相对粗疏,法治土壤的相对贫瘠以及民众认识存在偏差等现实因素。建议将法院确立为刑事和解的唯一主导机关、科学界定刑事和解的适用范围、建立以法院和当事人主体的双核启动模式、细化刑事和解在公诉案件中适用步骤、将是否和解作为量刑参考要件,以期优化刑事和解在公诉案件中的适用。 |
| English Summary: |
| An analysis of District M's public prosecution cases demonstrates that, cases in which criminal reconciliations could be applied but not have gotten a high percentage, whereas the percentage of successful application is very low, and the type of cases applying criminal reconciliations is single. This situation are caused by four reasons, the leading agency in criminal reconciliations is blurred, the legal norms about criminal reconciliations are not rigorous, the rule of law hasn't gotten a sound foundation, and there is mistake in people's understanding of criminal reconciliations. Hence, following measures should be carried out to make the application of criminal reconciliations better:determining courts as the unique leading agency, refining the suitable scope that criminal reconciliations can be applied, establishing a new model in which both courts and litigants can start a criminal reconciliation, formulating the applying process more detailed, and making criminal reconciliations as essential elements in the measurement of penalty. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
|
| 关闭 |
|
|
|