“认罪认罚从宽制度”量刑建议精准化的困境与完善路径

Dilemma and Improvement to the Accuracy of the Sentencing Suggestions of Leniency System of Confession and Punishment

《关于适用认罪认罚从宽制度的指导意见》规定对“认罪认罚”与“自首、坦白”不作重复评价,但二者的关系并没有因此而得以明确界定;职权主导模式没有为真正的量刑协商创造基本条件;缺乏程序保障和物质保障,值班律师的作用实效仍然有所欠缺;法院检察院对“量刑权”存在认识分歧,缺乏统一量刑指导意见,造成量刑建议与宣告刑的差异化,在形式和实质两个层面影响量刑建议的精准化。在完善精准化量刑的对策出路上,应在界定认罪认罚从宽与自首、坦白既有包含又有并列的关系上对从宽幅度做分层设计;应强化制度与程序保障,落实值班律师的物质权益保障,增强值班律师工作实效;法院检察院要加强沟通,及时更新司法理念,共同制定量刑指导意见;要积极总结经验,增强培训,探索智能精准量能辅助系统。

"Guiding Opinions on the Application of the Leniency System for Confessions and Punishment" does not make repeated evaluation on "confession and punishment" and "surrender and confession", but there are some problems: it does not clearly define the relationship between them;the mode of authority leading does not create the basic conditions for the real sentencing negotiation;there is the lack of procedural and material guarantee, the actual effect of the lawyer on duty is still unpredictable;courts and procuratorates have different understandings of "sentencing power";the lack of unified sentencing guidance can result in the difference between sentencing suggestions and sentencing declaration. In order to improve the accurate sentencing, we should define the relationships between "confession and punishment" and "surrender and confession" as well as make a hierarchical design from a broad range;we should enhance the effectiveness of the work of the lawyers on duty by strengthening the system and procedure guarantee, implementing the material rights and interests guarantee of the lawyers on duty. Procuratorates and courts should strengthen communication, update the judicial concept, work collaboratively to formulate the sentencing guidance. We should actively summarize experience, enhance staff training, and explore intelligent and accurate measurement assistant system.