APEC成员合作反腐司法一体化机制构建

Establishing Cooperative and Integrated Judicial Mechanisms against Corruptions among APEC Members

APEC是内部联系较为紧密的区域经济组织,具有共同的遏制腐败犯罪的必要性。《联合国反腐败公约》对各缔约国提出的反腐败要求是APEC成员间合作反腐的基本依据。但由于区域结构的特征与成员体各方的政治模式、法律制度和现实状况不同,深度合作的基础还存在一定障碍。这种困境,一方面使一些跨国腐败犯罪案件因相关成员体在合作条件上缺乏共识而未能得到及时处理;另一方面,对于正在被调查、处理的腐败犯罪案件,也因各司法区管辖权的独立性和执法机制的刚性而面临"双重追责"或刑罚失度等不公平待遇的危险。文章提出,APEC成员应当在依照《联合国反腐败公约》对腐败行为实行一体化预防和追查的基础上,践行《北京反腐败宣言》达成的共识,创新建立惩治腐败犯罪的一体化机制。通过APEC会议协商,确定一套统一的处理涉外腐败案件规则,由其中一个国家(或其独立司法区)对案件行使司法管辖权,负责侦查(包括共同调查)、起诉和审判。除司法协助外,侦查、起诉和审判案件的程序适用法院地法;对犯罪人判处刑罚的实体规定适用犯罪行为地法;对犯罪行为地处于多个国家(或其独立司法区)的情形,以选择对犯罪人相对有利的法律予以适用。

Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation （APEC） is a regional economic organization, with intimate internal interconnectivity. Its common mission is to curb corruptive crimes. The requirements, imposed on members by the United Nations Anti-corruption Convention, serve as fundamentals for the cooperative anti-corruption among the members. However, due to the differences in regional structures, as well as political models, legal systems and status, the obstacles for further cooperation still find their marks. On the one hand, this dilemma postpones the timely settlement of some transnational corruption crime cases as members fail to reach a consensus on cooperation. On the other hand, as for those being investigated or handled, unfair treatment such like ＂ dual liability＂ and senteficing misconduct will occur, because of different levels of the independence of the judicial jurisdiction and legal rigidity. This paper proposes that APEC members obey the consensus reached by Beijing Declaration on Fighting Corruption, establish integrated Anti-corruption Mechanisms against corruptions, and work out a set of unified rules to deal with exotic corruptive cases through conference consultations. One of the members （ or the independent judicial districts ） is appointed to exercise jurisdiction, investigation （including joint investigation）, prosecution and trial. Besides the criminal judicial assistance, lexfori shall be applied to investigation, prosecution and trials while lex loci actus as substantive law shall be applied to imposition of penalty. Last but not least, favorable law shall be selected and applied to criminals when the places of criminal act involve different members.