导　　师： 林亚刚

学科专业： 030104

授予学位： 博士

作　　者： ;

机构地区： 武汉大学

摘　　要： 刑事和解制度是当前我国刑事法理论界和实务界的热门话题,对于我国能否实行以及实行后该如何构建符合中国历史文化传统和司法实践客观需要的刑事和解制度,学界及实务界众说纷纭。本文从中西方刑事和解制度的产生及其社会背景分析入手,对刑事和解制度的概念及特点、刑事和解制度在中西方的理论基础与法律价值、当代中国刑事和解制度构建的根基以及当代中国刑事和解制度化设计等问题进行了深入研究。在此基础上分析了刑事和解的制度困扰与解决途径,指出了相关刑事实体法及程序法的不足,并提出了完善刑事立法的建议。全文除前言外,共分为四章,约15万字。 前言部分,主要介绍了如何在刑事司法体系内实现既使犯罪者复归社会又保护被害者利益的理想目标的世界性课题,并就当前构建社会主义和谐社会、贯彻宽严相济刑事政策的时代要求而言,提出应当立足中国法律的本土资源,进一步探寻和发掘刑事和解制度的源流、理论基础、价值,总结司法实践经验和教训,逐步修改和完善相关刑事实体、程序法律制度,在当代中国有必要构建和推行刑事和解制度。 第一章,刑事和解制度概述。首先,文章从中西方刑事和解制度的产生及其社会背景分析入手,对刑事和解制度进行溯源。西方国家的刑事和解发端于二十世纪中叶,它产生的社会背景因素有二：一是以罪犯为中心的监禁矫正政策的失败,二是以被害人为导向的刑事保护政策思潮的勃兴。而逐本溯源地来看,刑事和解制度在我国有着深厚的历史文化土壤,传统的“和合”、“无讼”等思想观念是构建当代中国刑事和解制度的文化瑰宝。因此,应重估和解的价值、重视和解的功能,嫁接国外的先进思想和成功经验,实现刑事和解在立足中国传统“和合”文化本土资源上的伟大复兴。其次,通过对国内外学界、实务界有关刑事和解概念的比较分析,提出界定刑事和解应当考虑以下四个因素：即刑事和解不应一概排斥较为严重的刑事案件、不宜人为地限定调停人的范围、不应让刑事和解放任自流而沦为“私了”,以及刑事和解不仅仅是一种刑事诉讼制度,而是兼具刑事实体法与刑事程序法的内涵。进而认为,刑事和解,是指在犯罪后,加害人和被害人直接或经由调停人的帮助而相谈、协商,在加害人以认罪、赔偿、道歉等形式与被害人达成和解,经国家司法机关审查认可后,对加害人不追究刑事责任、免除处罚或者减轻、从轻处罚的一种刑事司法制度。同时,以此为基础对刑事和解与国内外相关概念进行了较为详尽的辨析,阐述了刑事和解制度所具有的恢复性、协商性、广泛性、前瞻性与灵活性五个方面的特点。 第二章,刑事和解制度的理论基础与价值分析。首先,文章对中西方刑事和解制度的理论基础进行介评。一般认为,“恢复正义理论”、“平衡理论”与“叙说理论”这三种理论构成了西方恢复正义理论的基本框架。“平衡理论”并不能全面地解构刑事和解的制度价值,因而是片面的、欠成熟的；“叙说理论”立论的根据仍然显得过于单薄；“恢复正义理论”是刑事和解籍以升华为刑事法律制度的根本理由。在倡导建立社会主义和谐社会、贯彻宽严相济的刑事政策的今天,刑事和解需要协调各种利益关系,尽可能兼顾多种价值取向。刑事和解既要寻求公正与效率之间的平衡,在公正中还要顾及实体公正和程序公正之间的平衡。因此,构建和谐社会理论是中国刑事和解制度最根本的理论基础,宽严相济则是刑事和解制度的刑事政策基础,司法实践的客观需要构成刑事和解制度的现实基础,刑事和解制度体现的价值多元与手段多样则是其正当性的法理基础。其次,通过对刑事和解制度的公正、效率、自由和秩序价值进行较为深入的分析后认为,我国刑事和解模式并非将“国家——个人”的犯罪分析视角调整为以社会为顶点,以被害人和加害人为两端的三角模式,主导刑事和解的仍然是国家司法机关而非抽象的社会。因此,我国刑事和解模式是以国家为顶点,加害人、被害人、社区为底面三角的三棱体立体构造,只有在这种国家——加害人、被害人、社区共同参与的立体架构下,才可能实现多面的、全方位的恢复正义。因此,刑事和解不宜定位为个人本位主义的刑法价值观。最后,以历史发展阶段为线索,对比因所处时代和阶级背景的差异而在人类社会大致出现过的等级秩序观、个人本位秩序观、社会本位秩序观以及历史唯物主义秩序观这四种秩序观,分析得出由于力量对比和价值观念的差异,人类社会大致出现过纯自力救济、纯公力救济、公力救济为主、自力救济为辅以及自力救济为主、公力救济为辅四种刑事纠纷解决机制。刑事和解理念认为,在国家公权力监督之下的私人之间通过“努力”解决刑事纠纷、化解矛盾的做法应被法律所提倡。因此,应当对后两者中的自力救济重新做出界定,即这里的力不再是“武力”而是“努力”。 第三章,当代中国刑事和解制度构建的根基。首先,文章对构建刑事和解制度的法制背景进行考察,认为“和合”、“无讼”、“明德慎罚”、“宽猛相济”是构建刑事和解制度的文化基础,人民调解制度是构建刑事和解的法律基础、刑事和解是对马锡五审判方式的发展、宽严相济是刑事和解的政策基础。其次,文章论证了构建刑事和解制度的法律根据,认为刑事和解制度与罪刑法定原则契合、与刑法面前人人平等原则适配、与罪责刑相适应原则吻合、与刑法谦抑性原则默契、刑事和解论的犯罪观与犯罪的本质相一致因而具有较为充分的刑事实体法根据；刑事和解制度契合创设刑事诉讼程序的公正、秩序、效率的价值目标,并且符合未成年人刑事诉讼程序的特点及符合不捕、酌定不起诉制度的立法精神因而具有较为充分的刑事程序法根据。 第四章,当代中国刑事和解制度化设计。文章从刑事和解的主体与适用范围、刑事和解的适用条件与阶段、刑事和解的实施机构、刑事和解程序之设计、刑事和解的法律效力、刑事和解的司法监督与控制这些方面对构建符合中国历史文化传统和司法实践客观需要的刑事和解制度模式进行了较为深入的探讨。首先,文章认为,适用刑事和解的案件应当具有从犯罪性质来看,单纯涉及或犯罪主要客体与次要客体均涉及个人法益的侵犯人身和财产权益的犯罪；以及从犯罪人的主观恶性来看,犯罪人主要是初犯、偶犯、过失犯、中止犯、胁从犯、激情犯罪等主观恶性较小的犯罪这两个基本特征。其次,刑事和解可以在刑事诉讼的侦查、审查起诉、审判和刑罚执行的各个阶段进行：侦查机关立案后可以对可能判处徒刑以下刑罚的轻微刑事案件进行和解；检察机关审查起诉时可以对可能判处三年有期徒刑以下刑罚的轻罪案件进行和解；审判机关审判时可以对可能判处三年有期徒刑以上刑罚的重罪案件进行和解；即使在刑罚执行阶段,犯罪人与被害人愿意和解的,同样可以启动刑事和解程序。在任何阶段的刑事和解过程中,作为享有法律监督权和审查起诉权的检察机关、人民监督员,都应该在刑事和解中发挥其重要的监督作用。再次,在侦查阶段进行的刑事和解,经检察机关审查同意后,对于达成和解协议并履行完毕或者提供有效担保的,侦查机关应作撤案处理。在侦查机关向检察机关提请批准逮捕后,经和解达成协议并履行完毕或者提供有效担保的,检察机关可对犯罪嫌疑人作出不予逮捕决定,侦查机关接到该决定后应撤销案件。在审查起诉阶段,双方达成和解协议、经济赔偿履行完毕或者提供有效担保,且被害人自愿放弃追究或减轻犯罪嫌疑人刑事责任的,公诉部门对犯罪嫌疑人应当作出不起诉决定或者向审判机关提出从宽处罚的量刑建议,法院在裁量刑罚时应当作为参考。在审判阶段,对于犯罪之后,能够及时有效地减轻或消除犯罪后果的,经调解人调解并求得被害人谅解的,人民法院可以对犯罪人从轻、减轻或者免除处罚。其中,犯罪后果完全消除的,应当免除刑事处罚或判处缓刑。对于犯罪情节较重,事后采取补救措施,积极赔偿被害人损失,经调解人调解并取得被害人谅解,且被告人经审查确定没有再犯可能性的,可以从轻、减轻处罚或判处缓刑。对于在审查起诉阶段进行的刑事和解及检察机关提出的量刑建议,人民法院应当作为量刑的参考,对犯罪人做出相应的从轻、减轻或者免除处罚的判决。在刑罚执行阶段,对于达成和解协议并履行完毕或者提供有效担保的,经各刑罚执行机关申报,人民法院审核裁定、检察机关审查批准后可对囚犯予以减刑、假释或监外执行。最后,对于可能判处徒刑以下刑罚、拘役或者管制,或者单处或并处罚金的轻微刑事案件,刑事和解可以视为一种特殊的定罪情节来对待。但是,对于其他重罪,出于防卫社会的考虑,只能将刑事和解作为量刑情节对待。刑事和解作为法定量刑情节时,既可以设定为命令性量刑情节,也可以设定为授权性量刑情节。刑事和解的具体实施方式,可以采取类似刑事和解听证会的形式来进行。除轻微刑事案件允许自行和解外,刑事和解原则上应采取听证会的形式进行。此外,文章在分析刑事和解的制度困扰的基础之上,指出了相关刑事实体法及程序法的不足,并提出了完善刑事立法的建议。 Currently, victim-offender-reconciliation system is a hot topic in China's criminal law theory and practice field, China can implement and how to construct what kind of pattern of the victim-offender-reconciliation system conforms to China's historical and cultural traditions and objective need of judicial practice, Scholars and practitioners are twittering. Starting with analysis of its production and social background in China and western countries, this dissertation lucubrates the concept and features of it, its theoretical basis and law value in China and western countries, the foundation of constructing criminal reconciliation system and its institutionalized design etc. in contemporary China. On this basis, the author analyses what troubles the criminal reconciliation system and how to settle them.At the same time, the author points out the insufficiency of the relevant criminal law and procedural law, and puts forward some suggestions on perfecting in the criminal legislation. Except for the introduction, this article consists of four parts, with about 150,000 words. The preface mainly introduces ideal target of global interest on how to realize both social return of criminals and protection of the victims in the criminal justice system, and as far as the construction of socialist harmonious society and implementing the policy of "tempering justice with mercy" are concerned, the auther puts forwards that we should on the foundation of local law resources of China, further explore and excavate the origin, the theoretical basis and the value of criminal reconciliation, and summarize the experience and lesson in judicial practice, gradually modify and improve correlative criminal law and procedural law system. The auther thinks that it is necessary to construct and implement victim-offender-reconciliation system in contemporary China. Chapter I is about the summarization of victim-offender-reconciliation system. Firstly, the article analyses the traceability by analyzing the production and social background of victim-offender-reconciliation system in China and western countries. Western criminal reconciliation system originated in the mid-twentieth century, it has two social background factors:one is the failure of the criminal policy with the prison correctional as the center, second is the prosperity of the criminal policy about the protection of the victim. But chasing the traceability, victim-offender-reconciliation system in our country has profound historical culture, the traditional" harmony ", "no litigation " ideas are cultural treasures in constructing the criminal reconciliation system of contemporary China. Therefore, we should value the revaluation of reconciliation, pay attention to the function of reconciliation, grafting foreign advanced ideas and successful experience in criminal reconciliation, realize the revival of victim-offender-reconciliation system on the foundation of traditional local Chinese " harmony "culture resources. Secondly, through comparative analysis the concept of criminal reconciliation at home and abroad, the author puts forward that four factors should be considered in defining criminal reconciliation:criminal reconciliation should not exclude serious criminal cases, unfavorably to limit the scope of mediator, we should not let criminal reconciliation be and shoplifting-spare into the "elder brother ", and criminal reconciliation is not only a kind of criminal litigation system, but also both criminal law and criminal procedural law. And then, the criminal reconciliation is a criminal justice system, which refers to injures and victims reach reconciliation by talking to each other and negotiating directly or through a mediator's help, when the aggressors confess, compensate and apologize to the victim, through the examination and approval of the state judicial authorities, the aggressor may be exempted from punishment or obtain a mitigated criminal responsibility when the crime has happened. On this basis, the author makes a detailed analysis on criminal reconciliation with related concepts, and elaborates that victim-offender-reconciliation system has five characteristics, which are restorative, consultation, universality, forward-looking and flexibility. Chapter II discusses theoretical basis and value of criminal reconciliation. Firstly, this article introduces and comments on theoretical basis of criminal reconciliation system in China and western countries. Generally, "restorative justice theory", "equity theory" and "narrative theory" are considered as constituting the basic framework of western restorative justice theory. " equity theory" cannot fully deconstruct the value of victim-offender-reconciliation system, it is one-sided and mature, theoretical basis of "narrative theory" is still too thin, " restorative justice theory" is the basic reason which criminal reconciliation can be sublimated as criminal law system. Today, in advocating a socialist harmonious society, implementing of the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy, criminal reconciliation should coordinate the various interests and take multiple values. Criminal reconciliation not only should seek the balance between efficiency and fairness, but also should seek the balance between entity justice and procedural justice in justice. Therefore, constructing the harmonious society theory is the most basic theoretical basis of victim-offender-reconciliation system in China, criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy is the criminal policy foundation, the objective need of judicial practice is realistic foundation, and the value diversity and various methods of legitimacy is the legal basis. Secondly, Based on the in-depth analysis through fairness and efficiency, freedom and order value of criminal reconciliation system, the author thinks that criminal reconciliation mode in our country never adjusts crime analysis angle of "country-individual" to triangle mode, which society is as vertex, and the victims and injures are as two ends, it is national judicial organ rather than abstract society that leads criminal reconciliation. Therefore, Chinese criminal reconciliation model is based on 3 arris body three-dimensional structure, which country is as vertex, and the victims, injures and society are as three ends, only in this country-injures, victim, and community participation in the three-dimensional structure, polyhedral, comprehensive" restorative justice " may be realized. Therefore, the criminal reconciliation is unfavorably localized as individualism of criminal values. Finally, considered historical stage of development as clues, and compared with differences of class background, human society has generally appeared level order, personal standard order, social standard order and historical materialism order. Thus, human society has generally appeared pure self-help, pure and relief, male relief and self-help complementary and self-help, male relief as four subsidiary criminal dispute resolution mechanism. The idea of criminal reconciliation thinks that under the supervision of the public power, through the "efforts" between private in solving criminal disputes, resolving conflicts should be advocated by laws. Thus, the self-help here is no longer "force" but" efforts " instead. ChapterⅢdiscusses the foundation in constructing criminal reconciliation system in contemporary Chinese. Firstly, after investigating the legal background in constructing criminal reconciliation system, this article thinks "harmony", "no litigation", and "penalty absolve mingde" and "wide leniency" are culture foundation in constructing the victim-offender-reconciliation system, people's mediation system is the legal basis, criminal reconciliation is developed from Maxiwu judgement way, the criminal policy of tempering justice with mercy is the policy basis. Secondly, this paper argues for constructing the victim-offender-reconciliation system according to law, and think that victim-offender-reconciliation system fits the principle of legality, the principle that everyone is equal before the law, the principle of adaptive principle of suiting punishment to anastomosis, the austerity of criminal law and criminal essential principles, so it has sufficient criminal law foundation. It also fits justice, order, efficiency values in creating criminal proceedings, and it conforms to the characteristics of minors crime and the spirit of no arrest, no prosecution in the legislative system, so it has sufficient procedural law foundation. Chapter IV discusses the institutionalized design of criminal reconciliation in contemporary China. This part of dissertation thoroughly discusses certain aspects constitute the mode of criminal reconciliation system meeting the needs of Chinese historical and cultural tradition, and the objective needs of judicial practice, which are the subject and the scope application, the applied condition and stage, the implementing agency of the criminal reconciliation, the procedural design of criminal reconciliation program, and its legal effect, judicial supervision and control. Firstly, the author deems, criminal reconciliation should be applicable to the crimes which have two fundamental characters----from the view of criminal character, the major object and secondary are both involved in crimes violated individual legal right of person and right of property, and the criminals from the view of subjective malice of the criminal's mind are mainly first offence, casual offence, negligent crime, suspend crime, accomplice under duress crime of passion etc. Secondly, the criminal reconciliation in criminal lawsuit can be applied during investigation, prosecution, judgment and execution of punishment of various stages:investigative organ after the case being filed may be sentenced to imprisonment which may slightly below the criminal punishment for reconciliation. The prosecutorial organs for prosecution may be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years which all are a misdemeanor for reconciliation. Judicial organs during judgment may be sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than three years----all are felonious crime for reconciliation. Even in the penal execution stage, criminal reconciliation program can also be commenced with the willing of both criminals and the victims. At any stage of the criminal settlement process, as the prosecutorial organs and the people's supervisor with the power to supervise and examine law, and prosecution, should play its important role in criminal settlement of supervision. Thirdly, in the criminal investigation phase, under the examination and approval by the prosecutorial organ being performed or providing effective guarantee, the investigation organ shall withdraw the case. After prosecutorial organs made the decision on approval of the arrest of a criminal suspect, and the reconciliation being established and performed or providing effective guarantee, the prosecutorial organs should make decision on making indictments without arrests against the criminal suspect, the investigative organ should revoke the case after receiving the decision. In the prosecution stage, a reconciliation agreement or an economic compensation has reached by both sides have already implemented to complete or providing effective guarantee, the victim voluntarily gave up or mitigated the criminal suspect criminal responsibility, the prosecutorial organs should make a non-prosecution decision or to make specific opinions about measuring penalty, which should be used as a reference for discretion in courts. In the trial stage, for those crimes who can timely and effectively relieve or eliminate the consequences of the crime, and after mediation of the mediators and understanding by victims, the people's court may give a lighter or mitigated punishment or the criminal may be exempted from punishment. When consequence of crime is completely eliminated, the criminal may be exempted from criminal punishment or probation. In the circumstances of the heavier crime, afterwards, the criminal actively takes remedial measures for the loss of the victim, and obtain the mediation, moreover the defendant is examined with no possibility to crime again, the criminal may be given a lighter or mitigated punishment or probation. For reconciliation in the criminal prosecution stage and prosecutorial organs' suggestion, the people's courts should sentence specific opinions about measuring penalty for the reference of criminal penalty, accordingly, the criminal may be given a lighter or mitigated punishment or be exempted from punishment. In the penal execution stage, to reach a reconciliation agreement and to provide effective guarantee, through the executive punishment authorities, the court's ruling, and the prosecutorial organs' review after examination and approval, the prisoners may get commutation, parole or serve sentence outside of prison. Finally, it may be sentenced to imprisonment under punishment, criminal detention or public surveillance and shall also, or shall only, be fined or other minor criminal cases, the criminal reconciliation can be treated as a kind of convicted circumstances. But, for other felony, to protect society, it will only be treated as sentencing circumstances. When treated as legal circumstances, it either can be set as ordered circumstances, or can be set as authorization circumstances. Specific measures for the implementation of the criminal reconciliation, can adopt a similar criminal reconciliation form as hearing. Except for slight criminal cases, in principle, the victim-offender-reconciliation should be adopted in the form of hearing. In addition, based on the analysis of the trouble of criminal reconciliation system, this article points out the insufficiency of the related criminal law and procedural law, and puts forward some suggestions on perfecting criminal legislation.

关 键 词： 刑事和解 理论基础 价值分析 根基 制度化设计

分 类 号： [D925.2]

领　　域： [政治法律] [政治法律]