全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...

专门学校入校决定程序的反思与司法化改造
Reflection and Judicial Reform of the Admission Decision Procedure of Special Schools

DOI: 10.12677/OJLS.2024.123215, PP. 1492-1500

Keywords: 罪错未成年人,专门学校,专门教育,专门矫治教育,司法化
Delinquent Juveniles
, Special School, Special Education, Special Correctional Education, Judicialization

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

我国现行法律针对有严重不良行为的未成年人规定了矫治教育、专门教育、专门矫治教育等类型干预措施。专门学校作为专门教育与专门矫治教育两种罪错未成年人干预措施的执行场所,受到学界与公众的广泛关注。然而,关于未成年人进入专门学校接受专门教育或专门矫治教育决定程序的法律规定较为宏观、模糊,同时现行“评估同意 + 决定”的行政化入校决定模式也存在着评估主体与决定主体缺乏专业性、决定程序缺少未成年人参与、救济监督机制不完善等诸多弊病。应探索实现对专门学校入校决定程序的司法化改造:通过引入社会专业机构参与评估工作,增加评估工作的专业化程度;通过设置听证程序,保障未成年人的参与权;通过设置评估结果异议处理机制,保障未成年人的自我救济权。在此基础上,赋予评估结果以决定性效力,同时发挥教育行政部门与公安机关在专门学校入校决定程序中的程序性确认功能,以使专门学校入校决定程序更为合理,更为贴近实践需求。
China’s current laws provide intervention measures such as correction education, special education, special correctional education, and other types of for minors with serious bad behavior. As a place for the implementation of two kinds of intervention measures for juvenile delinquents, special education and special correction education, special schools have received extensive attention from the academic community and the public. However, the legal provisions on the decision-making process for minors to enter special schools for special education or special correctional education are relatively macroscopic and vague. At the same time, the current administrative decision-making mode of “assessment consent + decision” also has many disadvantages, such as the lack of professionalism of the evaluation subject and the decision subject, the lack of participation of minors in the decision-making process, and the imperfect relief and supervision mechanism. We should explore the realization of the judicial reform of the decision-making process of school enrollment in special schools: to increase the professionalization of the evaluation work by introducing social professional institutions to participate in the evaluation work; protect the right of participation of minors by setting up hearing procedures; the self-relief right of minors is guaranteed by setting up an evaluation result objection handling mechanism. On this basis, the evaluation results are given decisive effect, and the procedural confirmation function of the administrative department of education and the public security organs in the decision-making process of school enrollment in special schools is given full play, so as to make the decision-making process of school enrollment in special schools more reasonable and closer to the practical needs.

References

[1]  江勇. 专门教育指导委员会职能优化研究[J]. 中国青年社会科学, 2023, 42(3): 134-140.
[2]  孙鉴, 金泽刚. 专门教育评估制度的检视与形塑[J]. 中国青年社会科学, 2023, 42(4): 115-131.
[3]  姚建龙, 丁明洋, 毕琳, 等. 未成年人罪错行为保护处分处置制度构建探究——以南浔未检的实践探索为基础[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2021(3): 98-112.
[4]  吴羽. 罪错未成年人分级干预机制研究[J]. 犯罪研究, 2022(5): 23-34.
[5]  王贞会. 罪错未成年人司法处遇制度完善[J]. 国家检察官学院学报, 2020, 28(4): 134-148.
[6]  刘双阳. 从收容教养到专门矫治教育: 触法未成年人处遇机制的检视与形塑[J]. 云南社会科学, 2021(1): 92-99.
[7]  姚建龙. 未成年人违警行为的提出与立法辨证[J]. 中国法学, 2022(3): 266-282.
[8]  梁曦, 张洋. 罪错未成年人保护处分制度的构建[J]. 人民检察, 2020(19): 28-31.
[9]  周颖. 回应型立法理念下专门教育立法的走向——以《预防未成年人犯罪法》修订为视角[J]. 中国人民公安大学学报(社会科学版), 2022, 38(3): 11-19.
[10]  孙鉴, 金泽刚. 专门教育评估制度的检视与形塑[J]. 中国青年社会科学, 2023, 42(4): 115-131.
[11]  周羽枫. 我国建立未成年人罪错行为先议制度的探究[J]. 预防青少年犯罪研究, 2023(5): 57-65.
[12]  吴静. 制度与出路: 专门矫治教育制度困境与重构[J]. 重庆社会科学,2021(8): 91-103.
[13]  钱洪良, 张缓缓. 我国专门矫治教育中的权力行使与权利保护之维[J]. 青少年犯罪问题, 2022(5): 111-121.
[14]  陈小彪, 柳佳炜. 论未成年人专门矫治教育的刑行衔接——基于罪错未成年人教育矫治之体系性建构[J]. 中国青年社会科学, 2023, 42(2): 102-113.
[15]  高冰. 未达刑事责任年龄未成年人保护处分制度构建[J]. 人民检察, 2016(14): 53-55.
[16]  林琳. 我国涉罪未成年人观护制度实践不足与制度完善[J]. 兰州大学学报(社会科学版), 2020, 48(2): 169-176.
[17]  于阳, 孙传浩. 罪错未成年人处遇决定机制的改革困境与合理构建[J]. 政法学刊, 2021, 38(2): 48-57.
[18]  宋英辉, 钱文鑫. 我国罪错未成年人分级干预机制研究——以专门教育为核心抓手[J]. 云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2022, 54(6): 56-69.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133