法学研究

文章摘要

刑事诉讼办案期限：功能变迁与诉讼化改造

Time Limit for Handling Criminal Cases: Functional Changes and Litigation-based Transformation

DOI：

英文关键词: criminal procedure; time limit of handling cases; term of custody; time limit management; controlling powers and protecting rights

基金项目:

作者	单位
董坤	中国社会科学院法学研究所

摘要点击次数: 380

全文下载次数: 7

中文摘要:

对2018年刑事诉讼法第98条进行解释会发现，我国长期混淆误用办案期限和羁押期限。这是因为羁押期限依附从属于办案期限，而办案期限自创设之初即被赋予限制最长羁押期限的功能，但早期“一押到底”的现象十分普遍，致使两类期限难以分离，从而抑制了办案期限的其他重要功能。随着羁押与办案的分离，办案期限“提质增效”“控权保民”的独立价值和主要功能得以凸显。但实践层面，我国长期以行政手段管理办案期限，执着于时间约束和追求效率，忽略了当事人的期限利益和权利保障，办案期限“控权保民”的功能未充分彰显。完全抛弃办案期限，借鉴域外纯粹诉讼化的办案时间裁判机制，并不契合我国当下国情和传统司法经验，而渐进性的诉讼化改造方案更具合理性。改造的基本思路是，从权力主导型的办案期限管理模式迈向权利保障型的办案期限救济模式，淡化办案期限管理的行政化色彩，增强当事人在办案期限延长和调整中的参与度和话语权，建立办案期限迟延的救济补偿机制，强化检察机关对办案期限管理的外部监督。

英文摘要:

An interpretation of Article 98 of the Criminal Procedure Law (2018) shows that the time limit for handling cases and the term of custody of the criminal suspect or defendant in China have been confused with each other and misused for a long time. The reason for this is that the term of custody is subordinate to the time limit for handling cases. Since its establishment, the time limit for handling cases has the function of limiting the longest custody term. However, due to the widespread phenomenon of “custody to the end” in early stages of the implementation of this system, the two different limits are hard to be separated, and other important functions of the time limit for handling cases are suppressed. With the separation of custody and case handling, the independent value and main functions of time limit of handling cases, namely “improving quality and efficiency” and “controlling powers and protecting rights”, have been restored. In practice, however, China has always used administrative means to manage time limits, being obsessed with pursuing time constraints and efficiency while ignoring the protection of the interests and rights of the parties involved. As a result, the independent function of “controlling powers and protecting rights” in time limits has not been given full play to. At present, completely abandoning the time limit for handling cases and adopting the foreign litigation system is not in line with China’s national conditions and traditional judicial experiences. A gradual litigation-based reform plan is more feasible. The basic idea is to move from a power-dominated model of “handling” to a right-protecting model of “relief”, weaken the administrative management function of the time limit, enhance the participation and discourse right of parties in the extension and adjustment of the time limit, establish a relief and compensation mechanism for delay, and strengthen the external supervision by procuratorial organs over the management of the time limit.

查看全文下载PDF阅读器

关闭