论文部分内容阅读
在审判长宣布法庭辩论终结后,被告人有权做最后陈述,这是我国《刑事诉讼法》赋予被告人的一项重要的诉讼权利。但在审判实践中,一些审判人员对保障被告人最后陈述权缺乏正确认识,审判过程中有的弄不清这一独立诉讼阶段的法律意义,把被告人最后陈述简单看作是辩护的重复;有的担心被告人言词出格,硬性规定最后陈述的时间和内容;还有的把最后陈述作为“考察被告人认罪态度”,一味让被告人陈述犯罪的原因教训等。所有这些,都或多或少地违背了刑事诉讼的立法精神,在认识上是片面的,在实践中是有害的,必须引起司法机关的高度重视,在审判实践中加以纠正,从而保障被告人最后陈述权的充分行使。法庭辩论终结后让被告人最后陈述,不是辩护的重复,实质上是给被告人一个最后发言的机会。《刑事诉讼法》第118条规定“被告人有最后陈述的权利”,
After the presiding judge announced the conclusion of the courtroom debate, the defendant has the right to make a final statement. This is an important litigation right conferred on the defendant by the Criminal Procedure Law of our country. However, in the trial practice, some judicial officers lack of a correct understanding of the defendants’ right to make a final statement and some of the legal significance of this independent litigation stage in the course of the trial fails to make the final statement of the defendant a simple repetition of the defense. Some worry that the defendant made an exception in his speech, rigidly stipulated the time and content of the final statement, and others used the final statement as “examining the defendant’s guilty attitude” and blindly letting the defendant state the cause of the crime. All of these are more or less contrary to the legislative spirit of criminal procedure. They are one-sided in understanding and harmful in practice. They must be given high priority by the judiciary and be rectified in trial practice so as to protect the defendant The full exercise of the final right of statement. It is not a repetition of defense that the accused person makes the final statement after the court debate has ended. In essence, this gives the accused an opportunity to make a final statement. Article 118 of the Code of Criminal Procedure provides that “the defendant has the right to make a final statement”