【作者】 金晶；

【导师】 张复友；

【作者基本信息】 南京大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2020， 硕士

【摘要】 在我国历经两年的刑事诉讼试点工作之后,2018年新《刑事诉讼法》正式确立了刑事速裁诉讼程序。虽然以刑事速裁程序进行审理的案件案情较为简单,且被追诉人和国家追诉机关之间基本没有争议,但由于此类案件程序极度简化,易影响被追诉人行使相关权利,尤其是认罪认罚从宽制度试点工作的进一步开展,被追诉人在享有量刑协商权以及程序自主权的同时,一个值得关注的重要问题是怎样实现其进行认罪认罚的自愿性、公正性和程序选择的明智性。在过去学者探讨的话题中,就被追诉人拒绝认罪的案件而言,有效辩护的必要性和重要性似乎毋庸置疑,即辩护律师以法律赋予的诉讼权利为武器,通过会见、阅卷、质证和辩论等方式,依法与国家追诉机关展开对峙,确保被追诉人合法权益不受侵害,尽可能保障案件在实体上是真实的,在程序上是正义的;然而,对于被追诉人选择认罪的案件,尤其是速裁程序中的有效辩护问题,理论界和实务界则较少关注。在刑事速裁程序中,关于有效辩护的必要性及其基准、怎样实现有效辩护以及辩护失灵的程序救济等问题,与犯罪嫌疑人、被告人选择适用该程序的正当性息息相关,亟待以专题形式进行探讨。因此,本文欲以此为话题进行探讨,试图将速裁程序的特点与有效辩护理论联系起来,确保速裁程序中的辩护效果、完善速裁程序中的有效辩护。文章一共有引言、正文、结语三大部分,其中正文又分为四部分。第一部分提出了在刑事速裁程序中确保有效辩护的必要性问题。文章首先将刑事速裁程序中有效辩护的界定区别于普通程序,并立足于速裁程序的特点进行分析,即刑事速裁程序中的有效辩护应确保最低诉讼公正和诉讼合意有效性。在此基础上,文章进一步阐明了在速裁程序中确保有效辩护的必要性问题。第二部分分析了速裁程序中有效辩护的基准问题,其既包括辩护的特殊性,即辩护内容为认罪认罚自愿性和真实性、辩护重心为审前阶段、辩护方式为协商式;也包括有效辩护的要求,即律师如何在程序上进行参与。第三部分立足于速裁程序中有效辩护在司法实践中出现的问题,分析了问题背后的成因,认为值班律师定位偏差及有效辩护标准较难把握是导致现阶段速裁程序中辩护出现问题的主要成因。第四部分针对性提出了确保速裁程序达到有效辩护的对策及出现辩护失灵时的救济程序,即落实值班律师制度、完善指定辩护制度、保障审前辩护效果以及确立无效辩护的标准;同时要确保被追诉人的反悔权并根据不同诉讼环节进行程序救济,以期实现有效辩护。更多还原

【Abstract】 After two years of criminal trial work in our country,in 2018,the new criminal procedure law formally established the procedure of quick criminal adjudication.Although the cases that are tried by a quick criminal adjudication procedure have simpler cases,and there is basically no dispute between the person being prosecuted and the state prosecution agency,but the procedure for such cases is extremely simplified,it is easy to influence the respondent to exercise relevant rights,in particular,the further development of the pilot work of the leniency system,While the respondent enjoys the right of sentencing negotiation and procedural autonomy,an important issue worthy of attention is how to realize his voluntary,fair and procedural choice.In the topics that scholars have discussed in the past,In cases in which the accused refuses to plead guilty,The necessity and importance of an effective defense seems beyond question,That is to say,the defense lawyer uses the litigation rights granted by the law as a weapon and confronts the state prosecution agency in accordance with the law by meeting,reviewing papers,cross-examining and debating,so as to ensure that the legitimate rights and interests of the person being prosecuted are not infringed upon,As far as possible to ensure that the case is true in substance and just in procedure;However,the theoretical and practical circles pay less attention to the cases in which the respondent chooses to plead guilty,especially the effective defense in the process of quick adjudication.With regard to the need for an effective defence and its basis,how to achieve it and procedural remedies for its failure,It is closely related to the legitimacy of the application of this procedure by the criminal suspect and the defendant.Therefore,this paper intends to discuss this topic,and tries to connect the characteristics of the fast arbitration procedure with the effective defense theory,so as to ensure the defense effect in the fast arbitration procedure and improve the effective defense in the fast arbitration procedure.The article has three parts: introduction,text and conclusion,among which the text is divided into five parts.The first part raises the issue of the need to ensure an effective defence in the process of rapid criminal adjudication.This paper first distinguishes the definition of effective defense from that of ordinary procedure and analyzes the characteristics of the procedure,that is,the effective defense in the procedure should ensure the minimum justice and the effectiveness of the procedure.On this basis,the necessity of ensuring effective defense in the procedure of quick adjudication is further expounded.The second part analyzes the benchmark of effective defense in the process of quick adjudication,which includes the particularity of defense,that is,the content of defense is voluntary and authentic,the focus of defense is pre-trial stage,and the method of defense is negotiation.It also includes the requirement for an effective defence,that is,how the lawyer participates in the proceedings.The third part is based on the problems in the judicial practice of effective defense in fast arbitral proceedings,analyzes the causes behind the problems,and thinks that the bias of duty lawyers’ positioning and the difficulty in grasping effective defense standards are the main causes leading to the defense problems in fast arbitral proceedings at the present stage.In the fourth part,the author puts forward some countermeasures to ensure the effective defense of the fast ruling procedure,such as implementing the duty lawyer system,perfecting the designated defense system,ensuring the effect of pre-trial defense and establishing the standard of invalid defense.In the fifth part,the author proposes the remedy procedure when the defense fails in the quick adjudication procedure,and proposes to ensure the right of recourse of the respondent and to carry out the procedure remedy according to different procedures,so as to realize effective defense.更多还原