检察权的配置要以司法规律为圭臬,以权力制约、程序实体相统一等原则为指导,从具体制度上适当强化检察机关的法律监督权。针对检察官的不起诉裁量权,我国刑事诉讼法及相关司法解释设置了一系列的监督制约机制,以期能收到制衡之效。但这些制衡措施在实效性方面存在缺陷,有的也存在理论合理性方面的瑕疵。因此,需要在调整指导理念的基础上,对我国不起诉制约机制进行重构。民事执行检察监督是“监视”和“督正”的统一。在现行法中,检察院应当和可以采用纠正违法意见和其他法定方式对民事执行活动进行法律“督正”。新时期广大群众对司法机关化解社会矛盾、保障经济发展、维护社会稳定、维护公民权益的诉求十分强烈。检察机关应当积极延伸检察职能,构建以群众利益诉求为中心的矛盾化解机制。环境公益诉讼是指为保护公共环境利益,针对污染环境或者破坏生态的行为提起的诉讼。检察机关作为法律监督机关成为参与环境公益诉讼的当然主体,但是基于立法的缺陷,各地检察机关参与环境公益诉讼的模式不一,程序多元。有必要对当前检察机关参与环境公益诉讼的模式进行重新解读,从而建立一种统一的检察机关参与环境公益诉讼模式。检察建议是人民检察院履行诉讼监督职责和参与社会治安综合治理的一种形式。检察建议工作机制的建立,与其立法化问题一样,应当区分为诉讼监督类与非诉讼监督类两种情形分别进行研究,不同类型的检察建议配置不同的制度规范。 The arrangement of prosecutorial power should be guided by the principles of judicial law, guided by the principles of the restriction of power and the unification of procedural entities, and strengthen the legal supervision power of procuratorial organs from a concrete system. In view of prosecutors’ non-prosecution discretion, China’s Criminal Procedure Law and related judicial interpretations have set up a series of supervision and restraint mechanisms so as to be able to receive checks and balances. However, these checks and balances have some shortcomings in effectiveness as well as some defects in theoretical rationality. Therefore, on the basis of adjusting the guiding ideology, it is necessary to reconstruct our non-prosecution mechanism. Civil execution prosecutorial supervision is the unity of “surveillance” and “supervision”. In the current law, the procuratorate should and law can be used to correct illegal opinions and other statutory methods of civil enforcement activities The masses in the new era have a very strong appeals for the judiciary to resolve social conflicts, ensure economic development, maintain social stability and safeguard the rights and interests of citizens. Procuratorial organs should actively extend procuratorial functions and establish a mechanism of resolving conflicts that centers on the interests of the masses. Environmental public interest litigation refers to the lawsuit brought against the public for the sake of protecting the public environment, or for damaging the environment. As a legal supervisory organ, the procuratorial organ has become the natural subject participating in the environmental public interest litigation. However, due to the defects of the legislation, the various modes of participation of the procuratorial organs in the environmental public interest litigation vary from one program to another. It is necessary to re-interpret the current prosecutors’ participation in environmental public interest litigation so as to establish a unified prosecution mechanism to participate in environmental public interest litigation. Prosecutorial proposals are the people’s procuratorates to fulfill their litigation oversight responsibilities and participate in a comprehensive management of social order. The establishment of procuratorial suggestion working mechanism, like the issue of its legislation, should be divided into two categories: litigation supervisor and non-litigation supervisor respectively, and different types of procuratorial proposals should be provided with different system norms.