实证分析视角下的刑事庭前会议程序规制

On the Procedural Regulation of Criminal Pretrial Conference from the Perspective of Empirical Analysis

刑事庭前会议程序在运行中形成了分布不均衡和普遍趋同性特点,同时也存在认识偏离和运行异化现象,应当在准确法律定位基础上进行程序规制。基于此,庭前会议程序不能依据是否有律师参与和是否适用普通程序来确定适用的案件范围,主持者也不需要与正式庭审相分离;在内容上一般解决程序性问题,刑事附带民事调解只能作为庭前会议程序"附带"解决的事项,不应当作为启动庭前会议程序的独立理由;应当赋予庭前会议合意事项的法律效力,但有正当理由的可以允许推翻,同时对怠于行使权利的行为予以规制,明确此种情形将导致附条件失权的后果,除非有正当理由才允许补救。

Criminal pretrial conference procedure forms the characteristics of uneven distribution and general convergence in the operation, at the same time, there exists the deviation of cognition and the alienation of operation. So they should be regulated on the basis of accurate legal orientation. Based on this, pretrial proceedings may not determine the applicable scope of the case in the light of whether a lawyer is involved or not and whether an ordinary procedure is applicable or not, so the moderator does not need to separate from the formal trial. It generally addresses procedural issues, civil mediation can only be taken as 'incidental'matters and should not be used as a separate ground for initiating the pretrial conference proceedings. The legal effect of the agreement matter should be given to the pretrial conference, but may be overthrown in due course. At the same time we should regulate the behavior of lazy exercise of rights, by making it clear that this situation will result in the consequences of conditional loss of rights, unless the remedy is justified.