刑事管辖异议的裁判乱象——一种经验观察的视角

The Chaos of Judgments on Criminal Jurisdiction Objection——From an Empirical Perspective

我国的刑事诉讼法一直没有确立管辖异议制度,司法实践中各个法院对这一问题的裁判方式也十分混乱。具体而言,在经验层面上,刑事管辖异议的裁判模式主要有不予回应、在裁判理由中予以回应、单独作出裁定、单独作出书面答复等四种类型。但是,由于缺乏明确的制度规范,不仅当事人提出管辖异议欠缺权利基础,法院不同的处理方式也难以立判正误。客观存在的刑事管辖异议与制度空白以及法院裁判模式的乱象之间形成了强烈的反差,使得刑事管辖异议成为了一个亟需规范和解决的重要问题。

The system of jurisdiction objection has not been established in our country＇s criminal procedure law. The ways different courts used to judge the question have also been very chaotic in judicial practice. In particular,at the empirical level,the judgment model on criminal jurisdiction objection mainly assumes four types： not to respond,to respond in the judicatory ground,a separate decision and a separate written reply. However,due to the lack of a specific regulation system,not only that the parties raise a jurisdiction objection is lacking right basis,but also the ways court used to solve the problem are difficult to be judged right or wrong at once.There is a strong contrast among the criminal jurisdiction objection that exists objectively and the blank of the system and the chaos of the court＇s judgment model,which makes the criminal jurisdiction objection become an important problem that needs to be standardized and solved urgently.