摘要
通过对德国联邦最高法院若干上诉判决的分析,我们可以了解德国认罪协商制度下存在大量程序上的非正义,而这种程序上的非正义必须在现行刑事诉讼体系中找到合理的解决路径。德国联邦最高法院自2015年起的若干最新判决,展示出其基于刑事诉讼法的教义对认罪协商制度作出的新解释。其强化上诉审对认罪协商合法性的审查,颠覆我们对协商性司法简化诉讼程序、提升司法效率的原本认知。在共同的职权主义诉讼模式背景下,对我国适用认罪认罚从宽的案件而言,上诉权不可协商放弃,法院应在庭审中承担程序性主导义务,二审法院可采"自我拘束观点"适用一审认罪认罚下的自白,同时保障被告人辩护权的有效行使及被害人实质性地参与认罪认罚全过程。
Through analysis of certain appeal judgments of the German Federal Supreme Court,we understand that there may be a large number of procedural injustices under the guilty plea,and we must find a reasonable solution path in the current criminal procedural system.Since 2015 the German Federal Supreme Court has issued a number of judgments,demonstrating its new interpretation about the guilty plea based on the doctrine of the criminal procedure law.It strengthens the review of the legality of the guilty plea procedure in appeals,subverting our original understanding of the negotiating procedure of simplifying the proceedings and improving the judicial efficiency.In the context of the common mode of litigation,in the case of the application of guilty plea in China,the right of appeal can not be negotiated,the court should assume the procedural dominant obligation in the trial,and the second-instance court may adopt the"self-restraint thesis"to apply the confession,while ensuring the effective defense for the defendant’s right and the substantial participation of the victim in the whole process of guilty plea.
出处
《比较法研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2020年第2期90-107,共18页
Journal of Comparative Law
基金
司法部2018年度国家法治与法学理论研究项目“中美德刑事审前分流构造研究”(18SFB3022)的阶段性研究成果
2019年度国家社会科学基金项目“现代法治视野下侦查行为的起点问题和法律边界研究”(19BFX079)的资助。
关键词
认罪协商
二审程序
上诉权放弃
法律救济
程序性义务
guilty plea
second-instance procedure
abandonment of the right to appeal
legal remedies
procedural obligations
