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...

认罪认罚从宽制度中被追诉人反悔权的程序规制研究
Research on the Procedural Regulation of the Right of Repentance of the Accused in the System of Confession and Punishment Leniency

DOI: 10.12677/ojls.2025.134099, PP. 679-688

Keywords: 认罪认罚从宽制度,反悔权,程序规制,实证研究,法理分析,司法实践
System of Confession and Punishment Leniency
, Right of Repentance, Procedure Regulation, Empirical Study, Jurisprudence Analysis, Judicial Practice

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

本研究聚焦于当前司法实践中越来越重要的认罪认罚从宽制度,探究被追诉人反悔权在制度框架内的定位及其过程规制问题。文章首先明确认罪认罚制度的内涵与价值,明晰其目的与适用范围,比较不同国际法域中类似制度的实现形式,为后续分析提供参照标准。在此基础上,分析反悔权的法律性质,指出司法实践中的问题与挑战,并通过实证分析揭示反悔权实际运作的情况。研究结果表明,尽管反悔权在保障被追诉人权利方面发挥了重要作用,但其程序规制在实践中仍存在不足,需进一步优化以提高制度效能。文章的结论旨在为完善认罪认罚从宽制度、保护被追诉人合法权益提供理论依据与政策建议。
This research focuses on the increasingly important system of leniency for guilty pleas in current judicial practice and explores the position of the right of the accused to repent within the institutional framework and its process regulation. This paper first clarifies the connotation and value of the confession system, clarifies its purpose and scope of application, compares the realization forms of similar systems in different international laws, and provides reference standards for subsequent analysis. On this basis, the legal nature of the right to repent is analyzed, the problems and challenges in judicial practice are pointed out, and the actual operation of the right to repent is revealed through empirical analysis. The results show that although the right of repentance plays an important role in guaranteeing the rights of the accused, its procedural regulation is still insufficient in practice, and it needs to be further optimized to improve the system’s efficiency. The conclusion of this paper is to provide a theoretical basis and policy suggestions for improving the system of lenient punishment for guilty plea and protecting the legitimate rights and interests of the accused.

References

[1]  谢昕彤. 轻罪治理背景下刑事速裁程序研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 杭州: 浙江工商大学, 2023.
[2]  刘润宇. 反悔权视角下认罪认罚案件的上诉审查机制构建[J]. 牡丹江教育学院学报, 2023(5): 118-122.
[3]  Redlich, A.D. and Bettens, T. (2023) The Effects of Confessions on Misconduct and Guilty Pleas in Exonerations: Implications for Discovery Policies. Criminology & Public Policy, 23, 179-199.
[4]  谢小剑. 认罪认罚从宽案件中以抗诉应对量刑上诉之质疑[J]. 环球法律评论, 2023, 45(2): 193-209.
[5]  李雪平, 王磊, 尚念安. 认罪认罚案件证明标准研究[J]. 中国司法, 2023(6): 61-67.
[6]  陈兴良. 程序与实体双重视野下认罪认罚从宽制度的教义学反思[J]. 政法论坛, 2023, 41(5): 3-14.
[7]  于秋. 认罪认罚从宽制度的现实理路分析[J]. 法制博览, 2023(12): 139-141.
[8]  梅银洪. 认罪认罚从宽制度下的法检关系研究[D]: [硕士学位论文]. 杭州: 浙江工商大学, 2023.
[9]  谢小剑. 认罪认罚从宽制度中被追诉人反悔权研究[J]. 江西社会科学, 2022, 42(1): 84-93.
[10]  徐志亮. 认罪认罚从宽制度中被追诉人反悔权研究[J]. 法学, 2024, 12(10): 6268-6272.
[11]  刘少军. 完善认罪认罚从宽具结书的三个维度: 性质、内容与效力分析[J]. 政法论坛, 2020, 38(5): 108-118.
[12]  汪海燕. 被追诉人认罪认罚的撤回[J]. 法学研究, 2020(5): 175-193.
[13]  肖沛权. 论被追诉人认罪认罚的反悔权[J]. 法商研究, 2021, 38(4): 172-185.
[14]  向泽远. 控辩对抗的审前模式——兼论检察机关如何因应“以审判为中心” [J]. 政法论坛, 2017(11): 75.
[15]  全成浩, 闾刚. 量刑建议“检察主导”的逻辑解构与制度重塑[J]. 江苏警官学院学报, 2023, 38(2): 31-43.
[16]  赵何佚玺. 认罪认罚从宽制度中附条件上诉的问题及对策[J]. 法律适用, 2023, 2023(5): 169-177.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133