论文部分内容阅读
起诉制约裁判,是现代不告不理原则的基本体现。在起诉方式上,英美法系采用诉因制度,大陆法系采取公诉事实制度,两种起诉方式在公诉效力方面存有差异,尤其体现在法官变更罪名之裁判权方面。两大法系起诉方式与公诉效力的差异主要源于诉讼理念以及诉讼制度的不同。我国在公诉效力问题上尚缺乏明确立法规定,实践中法院越权裁判时有发生,确立公诉效力原则很有必要。
The prosecution of the restraining judge is the basic embodiment of the principle of ignorance of the modern times. In the way of prosecution, Anglo-American legal system adopts the system of vindication, civil law system adopts the factual system of public prosecution, and there are differences between the two methods of prosecution in the effect of public prosecution, especially in the aspect of the judge’s jurisdiction to change the charges. The differences between the two legal systems of prosecution and the effectiveness of public prosecution mainly come from the different concepts of litigation and litigation system. In our country, there is still a lack of clear legislative provisions on the issue of the effectiveness of public prosecution. In practice, courts often have ultra vires judgment and it is necessary to establish the principle of public prosecution.