摘要
2018年刑诉法修正案确立了缺席审判制度,但这一制度的具体适用上存在着相当大的模糊,主要是在缺席审判程序与没收违法所得程序的联系与区别、被告人在境外的证据把握、适用缺席审判制度案件的证明标准、缺席审判制度对被告人的权利保障等问题中。正确落实此项制度,就必须区别违法所得没收程序,着重把握被告人确系境外无法到庭审判的证据和来自境外的证据的审查使用,针对不同适用对象设置不同的证明标准,通过具体程序的完善加强对被告人的权利保障。
Amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law of 2018 established the system of trial by default,but there is a great deal of ambiguity in the specific application of this system,mainly in the connection and difference between the procedure of trial by default and the procedure of confiscating illegal gains,the grasp of overseas evidence related to the defendant,the standard of proof of the application of trial by default,and the protection of the rights of the defendant under the system of trial by default.To implement this system correctly,we must distinguish the procedure of confiscation of illegal gains,focus on the examination and use of the evidence that the defendant is abroad and cannot appear in court and the evidence from abroad,set different standards of proof for different applicable objects,and strengthen the protection of the rights of the defendant through the improvement of specific procedures.
作者
雷逸飞
许浩
LEI Yi-fei;XU Hao(School of law,Tsinghua University,Beijing 100084,China;School of Criminal Law,East China University of Political Science and Law,Shanghai 200042)
出处
《齐齐哈尔大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
2021年第3期95-98,共4页
Journal of Qiqihar University(Philosophy & Social Science Edition)
关键词
缺席审判
违法所得没收
境外证据
证明标准
人权保障
trial by default
confiscation of illegal gains
overseas evidence
standard of proof
human rights protection
