更新时间：08-25 （致青春郑微）提供原创文章
摘要:辩诉交易制度萌芽于十九世纪的美国，基于社会矛盾的日趋尖锐，美国高犯罪率以及刑事积案加剧的现实，为了避免诉讼当事人及其他诉讼参与人长时间的诉累之苦，最大限度的节约司法资源，提高审判效率而出现的一项诉讼制度。刑事和解制度在二十世纪兴起于西方国家，它是犯罪人与被害人之间的一种协商，旨在被害人获得损害赔偿，犯罪人获得宽恕谅解，社会秩序得到恢复。在公法私法化，私法公法化的发展进程中，再严肃的公法也会渗透私法的某些元素，而辩诉交易与刑事和解制度即是契约在公法中的体现。辩诉交易与刑事和解均有利有弊，反映着多种诉讼价值的矛盾与统一。鉴于此，本文在对辩诉交易与刑事和解制度比较研究的基础之上，对其在我国的构建进行了可行性分析并提出立法上的完善和制度构建上的建议，在刑事和解制度和辩诉交易基础上实现辩诉交易与刑事和解的融合的新构想。
关键词：辩诉交易；刑事和解；可行性；融合
Abstract:Plea bargaining system，generated in the 19th century，which is a procedure system in order to avoid litigants and other participants in the proceedings of the First Instance tired a long time the pain of judicial resources to maximize savings and improve lawsuit efficiency because of the high crime rate in America and the aggravating reality of criminal long-pending cases. Criminal reconciliation rose at the middle of the 20th century in the West, it is a consensus between offender and victim. It is designed to make the victim obtain damage compensation, the offender obtain a wide rage of understanding and the social order gain restoration. Between the trend of privatizing the public law and publicizing the private law, some elements are absorbed by the public law although it is serious. And the Plea bargaining system and the Criminal reconciliation are the contracts which are showed in the public law. Plea bargaining system and the Criminal reconciliation both have advantages and disadvantages, which reflects the contradiction and unity of various lawsuit value. In view of this situation, this thesis, based on the comparative study of the plea bargaining and the criminal reconciliation, discusses its feasibility in our country, puts forward some suggestions on the legislative system to improve and build on recommendations in order to achieve reconciliation in the criminal system and based on plea bargaining in criminal deeds of the new idea.
Key words: Plea Bargaining；Criminal Reconciliation；Feasibility；Integration
要结合我国传统文化以及现实司法情况，在借鉴西方辩诉交易和刑事和解制度的基础之上，明确我国两制度融合后新的制度的适用主体、范围以及适用条件。第一，需要确定主体，刑事诉讼中辩诉交易与刑事和解的融合制度的主体应该包括控诉机关、被害人、被告人及其辩护律师。但是考虑到犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的人身危险性，主观恶性较强，教育改造的难度也较大，不应适用于累犯、主犯。第二，主要适用于社会危害性不大，影响较轻的轻罪案件。第三，适用前提是犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的公开自愿认罪，即犯罪嫌疑人、被告人对针对自己的指控犯罪事实所作的承认，包括全部承认或部分承认。自愿是启动整个程序的前提，是辩诉交易与刑事和解的融合制度的合法源泉。犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的认罪是其自主选择的结果，被害人是否谅解也是自主意愿下的选择。在进行合意之前检察官有对被追诉人和被害人享有的权利义务以及法律后果的释明义务，这样才能确保当事人的意志自由是建立在充分知情的基础之上。