摘要(Abstract)：
实践中认罪认罚从宽制度在具体适用上尤其是在证据制度方面存在许多可探讨的理论问题。在证明标准方面,保持现有的刑事证明标准将更利于保障实体公正;在证明责任方面,须将认罪与认罚进行区分考量;在证据审查方面,着重审查被告人认罪自愿性和真实性;在证据规则方面,原则上应当允许适度从宽从简适用,在具体证据规则适用上还存在理论上的矛盾,还需进一步探讨。
关键词(KeyWords)：
Abstract:
Keywords:
基金项目(Foundation): the phased achievement of the National Social Science Fund Major Projects of 2017(17VHJ010);;
National Social Science Fund Project of 2013(13CFX056)
作者(Author): 郭志远;
Email:
参考文献(References)：
- 1 Zhu Xiaoqing,Several Questions about the System of Lenient Punishment for Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment,5Research on Rule of Law 35(2016).
- 2 Some scholars believe that the lenient system for admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment hides the motivation that promotes the production of Chinese characterized plea-bargain,which is much likely to be the system of Chinese characterized plea-bargain.See Zhang Jianwei,Lenient Treatment for Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment:Connotation Interpretation and Technical Analysis,11Journal of Law Application 2(2016).Some scholars believe that the lenient system for admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment is different from the plea-bargain which cannot be copied wholly from the West in current Chinese background of judicial reform,what is possible is learning from it appropriately.See Chen Ruihua,The Oretical Introspection on Reform of"Leniency for Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment":Based on the Investigation on Operation Experience of Criminal Quick Judging Procedure,4 Contemporaiy Law Review 3(2016);Other scholars believe that it is just a simple butt joint in procedure to combine the plea-bargain and leniency for admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment if the transaction negotiation procedure is regarded as the main tool to perfect the lenient system for admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment,which is a wrong theoretical cognition.Actually,it is possible that scholars with corresponding claim overlook the distinct system background between the leniency for admission of guilt and the acceptance of punishment and plea-bargain.See Zuo Weimin,How to Be Lenient for the Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment:Misunderstanding and Right Answer,Introspection on Reform Claim of"Efficiency Priority",3 Chinese Journal of Law 166(2017).
- 3 Chen Guangzhong,Research on Implementation Problems of Lenient System for Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment I1 Journal of Law Application 10(2016).
- 4 Chen Ruihua,Several Controversial Problems on Lenient System for Adnmission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment,1 China Legal Science 41(2017).
- 5 Some scholars insist that the criminal judicial procedure in China is a rapidly-developing one which has no obvious promoting room in efficiency,thus,the primary aim to perfect lenient system for admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment is to give the defendant preferential treatment of a lenient punishrrment,rather nonprograimmed convenience and efficiency.See Zuo Weiimin,supra note 2,164.
- 6 Chen Guangzhong,supra note 3,9.
- 7 Xiong Qiuhong,Theoretical Introspection and System Perfection of Lenient System for Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment,10 Law Science 97(2016).
- 8 Bian Jianlin&Zhang Lu,Understanding and Application of China's Criminal Proof Standard,3 Journal of Law Application 16(2014).
- 9 PETER MURPHY,MURPHY ON EVIDENCE,at 109(Blackstone Press Limited,1997).
- 10 CHEN RUIHUA,THEORETICAL PROBLEMS ON CRIMINAL LAW OF EVIDENCE,at 263(Law Press,2015).
- 11 Sun Yuan,On the Proof Standard of Guilt Admission and Punishment Acceptance Cases,11 Journal of Law Application 17(2016).
- 12 MATSUOKA YOSHIZHENG,RIGHTEOUSNESS:THE THEORY OF CIVIL EVIDENCE,at 32(Zhang Zhiben trans.,China University of Political Science and Law Press,2004).
- 13 Long Zongzhi,New Exploration on Several Problems of System of Criminal Burden of Proof,4 Modern Law Science I07(2008).
- 14 WANG HAIYAN&HU CHANGLONG,RESEARCH ON BASIC PROBLEMS OF CRIMINAL EVIDENCE,at 104(Law Press,2002).Actually,German scholar Prof.Julius Glasser classified the burden of proof into subjective burden of proof and objective burden of proof in I883,also called action liability and result liability,which are basically adopted by the later German scholars.The classification of burden of proof in China is also based on this theory.See HANS PRUETTING,PROBLEMS ON MODERN BURDEN OF PROOF,at 11(Wu Yue trans.,Law Press,2000).
- 15 CHEN RUIHUA,supra note 10,128.
- 16 Yang Yuguan,On Principle of No Compulsion Self-incrimination,1 Chinese Legal Science 132(2003).
- 17 CHEN GUANGZHONG,CRIMINAL PROCEDURE LAW,at 54(China University of Political Science and Law Press,1990).
- 18 SONG YINGHUI,AN EXPOSITION ON THE OBJECTIVE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE,at 207(Chinese People's Public Security University Press,1996).
- 19 HUANG WEIZHI,RESEARCH ON CRIMINAL BURDEN OF PROOF:SHUTTLE BETWEEN ENTITY AND PROCEDURE,at 33(Peking University Press,2007).
- 20 CHEN RUIHUA,THE FRONTIERS OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE(LAST VOLUME),at 498(China Renmin University Press,2016).
- 21 Chen Ruihua,Rules of Evidence in Sentencing Procedure,11 Jilin University Journal Social Sciences Edition 101(2011).
- 22 Wang Xiaohong,On the Distribution of Burden of Proof on Sentencing Facts:A Relatively Independent Sentencing Procedure as the Analytical Approach,11 Hubei Social Sciences 154(2013).
- 23 Chen Ruihua,Theoretical Introspection on Reform of uLeniency for Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment":Based on the Investigation on Operation Experience of Criminal Quick Judging Procedure,4 Contemporary Law Review 6(2016);The Criminal Law of the People's Republic of China,article 67.
- 24 Wei Xiaona,Perfecting Lenient System for Admission of Guilt and Acceptance of Punishment:The Development of Key Words i Chinese Context,4 Chinese Journal of Law 83(2016).
- 25 Chen Ruihua,supra note 23,5.
- 26 Shi Limei,The Revelation of the Fact Busis System of American Guilty Plea to China,1 Journal of National Prosecutors College 39(2017).
- 27 The admission of guilt here only refers to the admission in form and truthful confession,not differentiating the defendant s recognition of the facts of the accusation or the approval of accusation charges,thus here the truthful admission of guilt does not involve the connotation and denotation of the"guilt admission"itself.
- 28 ZHANG XIAOHU,COMPARISON AND CONSTRUCTION OF THEORY OF PUNISHMENT,at 397-398(Mass Publishing House,2010).
- 29 Shi Liimei,supra note 26,31.
- 30 LI XINJIAN,TECTONICS ON CRIMINAL PROCEDURE,at 140(China University of Political Science and Law Press,1998).
- 31 Chen Weidong&Zhang Jiahua,A Preliminary Study of Sentencing Evidence in the Context of the Reform of Sentencing Procedure,1 Evidence Science 5(2009).
- 32 Lan Yuejun,Construction of the Rule System of Criminal Evidence,6 Criminal Science 71(2015).
- 33 Liu Jianhua&Ren Yuntong,The Principle of Direct Speech and File Centralism:Rational Thinking on Current Mode of Criminal Sentence,6 Shandong Justice 60(2010).
- 34 Chen Ruihua,File-record Centralism:A New Investigation on China's Criminal Trial Mode,4 Chinese Journal of Law 79(2006).
- 35 Chen Ruihua,On the Rule of Correction of Defective Evidence,2 The Jurist 68(2012).
- 36 Chen Ruihua,The Chinese Model of the Exclusionary Rule of Illegal Evidence,6 China Legal Science 34(2010).
- 37 Ji Xiangde,The Establishment of Right of Sentencing Suggestion Shall Reflect the Negotiating Value between the Prosecution and Defense,Procuratorial Daily,March l1,2006,at 3.
