论文部分内容阅读
经过长期的理论研讨和工作试点,最高人民法院决定从今年10月1日起,在全国范围内全面推行量刑规范化改革,执行《人民法院量刑指导意见(试行)》和“两高三部”《关于规范量刑程序若干问题的意见(试行)》两个文件。按照最高人民法院的说明,这次改革的目的在于通过规范司法行为,统一法律适用标准,促进公正廉洁司法,提高法院的公信力和权威。中国司法领域向来存在重定罪轻量刑、重实体轻程序的倾向,在实践中,由于法官拥有较大的自由裁量权,且由于存在经济社会发展不均衡、社会发展情况复杂等客观原因,造成在司法领域或多或少地存在同案不同判、量刑畸轻或畸重等问题,也为司法领域的腐败与寻租提供了空间,造成了司法不公,侵蚀了司法廉洁,在一定程度上影响了法院的形象,亟待改进。为此,最高人民法院已在前几年就改革量刑方法进行了广泛而充分的调研,并在一些法院进行量刑规范化的试点,取得了显著的成效。在此基础上,最高人民法院单独并联合其他几个部门出台了关于量刑规范化的两个文件,进而在全国普遍推伉关于此次量刑规范化改革的前景、积极意义以及实践中可能存在的一些问题,我们约请国内刑法学界的知名学者发表看法,希望能够对顺利推进量刑规范化改革,进一步规范司法行为有所裨益。
After a long period of theoretical discussions and pilot work, the Supreme People’s Court decided that from October 1, this year, it will comprehensively promote standardized measurement of sentencing across the country and implement the “Guiding Opinions of the People’s Court on Punishment (Trial)” and “Two High Three” Opinions on Some Issues Regarding the Standardization of Sentencing Procedures (Trial) Two documents. According to the instructions of the Supreme People’s Court, the purpose of this reform is to standardize the judicial conduct, unify the applicable standards of law, promote fair and honest administration of justice and improve the credibility and authority of the courts. In the field of Chinese judiciary, there has always been a tendency of re-conviction of light sentence and emphasis on substantive light procedure. In practice, judges have greater discretion and due to the objective reasons such as the unbalanced economic and social development and complicated social development, In the judicial field, there are more or less different issues such as different sentences of joint prosecution, light punishment or abnormal punishment, and also provide room for corruption and rent-seeking in the judicial field, resulting in unfair administration of justice and erosion of judicial integrity, to a certain extent, affecting The image of the court, urgent improvement. To this end, the Supreme People’s Court has conducted extensive and adequate investigations into the reform of the sentencing measurement method in previous years, and has made remarkable achievements in piloting the standardization of sentencing in some courts. On this basis, the Supreme People’s Court alone and in conjunction with several other departments promulgated two documents concerning the standardization of sentencing and further pushed forward the prospect, positive significance and some problems that may exist in the practice of the standardized sentencing reform , We have invited well-known scholars from domestic criminal law academia to express their opinions and hopefully they will be beneficial to the smooth implementation of the standardized sentencing reform and the further standardization of judicial acts.