论文部分内容阅读
根据实证调研资料反映的情况,我国庭前会议制度的功能主要存在两个方面的问题:一是立法对庭前会议功能设定不到位,导致一些重大的程序性问题不能在庭前会议中作出实质性处理,影响庭前会议功能的充分发挥,即功能“缺省”;二是在庭前会议中即讨论与被告人的定罪、量刑密切相关的实体性问题,超越了庭前会议自身应有的功能定位,属功能“溢出”。针对前一问题,可以考虑通过修改司法解释,给程序性问题的实质性处理留出空间,并赋予其对后续审判程序的约束力;对于后一问题,实践中应区分主要争点与附带争点,可以在庭前会议中讨论解决的仅限于附带争点。
According to the facts reflected in the empirical research data, there are mainly two problems in the function of the pretrial system in our country. First, the legislation does not have the proper function of the pretrial meeting. As a result, some major procedural issues can not be made in the pretrial meeting Substantive treatment of the pre-trial meeting full function, that is, function “default ”; the second is in the pre-trial meeting to discuss the substantive issues closely related to the accused’s conviction, sentencing, beyond the pre-trial meeting Own function positioning, function “overflow ”. In view of the former question, we can consider making room for the substantive handling of procedural issues by modifying the judicial interpretation and giving it the binding force for subsequent trial procedures. For the latter issue, we should distinguish between major issues and incidental disputes in practice, The discussion that can be held in pre-trial meetings is limited to incidental disputes.