论文部分内容阅读
我国刑事诉讼法规定案件实行两审终审制。二审对于纠正一审中出现的错误,准确的查明案件事实发挥着积极作用,也可以说,二审在一定程度上肩负着程序性制裁的重任。而二审审理方式关系到二审功能的正常发挥,关系到保护被告人权利的最后一道屏障能否“拾遗补漏”。但是在二审程序中却大量地实行书面审理,这种书面审查方式大大削弱了二审程序对保护被告人权利的作用,阻碍了刑事诉讼实体公正和程序公正的实现。本文对二审审理方式中存在的问题予以分析,并提出对策。
China’s Criminal Procedure Law provides for the trial of second instance case. The second instance plays an active role in rectifying mistakes made in the first instance and accurately identifying the facts of the case. It can also be said that the second instance shoulders the heavy responsibility of procedural sanctions to some extent. However, the second trial method is related to the normal play of the second instance function, and it is related to whether the last barrier of defending the rights of defendants can However, a large number of written trials are conducted in the second instance procedure. Such written examination methods have greatly weakened the role of the second instance procedure in defending the rights of the accused and hindered the fairness of substantive criminal procedures and procedural fairness. This article analyzes the existing problems in the second instance trial and puts forward countermeasures.