英美法系迅速审判权与欧陆法系诉讼及时原则之间的制度对话——比较法视野下的刑事诉讼“合理期间”

Conversation between the Right to Speedy Trial in Common Law System and the Principle of Timeliness in Civil Law System——A Comparative Study on “Reasonable Time″ in Criminal Procedure

为实现诉讼程序的妥速运转、保障被告人能在"合理期间"内获得裁判,英美法系的迅速审判权模式与欧陆法系的诉讼及时原则模式虽在理念基础、程序节点选择、法官角色定位等方面有诸多不同,但都将时间问题视为一个需通过司法审查机制予以处理的法律问题。既充分尊重法官对时间裁量的良知和理性,也充分保障被告人在时间审查程序中的参与权。基于两大法系国家保障"合理期间"的共通性规律,可对中国的"合理期间"保护模式进行反思和变革,包括:确立诉讼及时原则或迅速审判权;实现办案期间和羁押期间的制度分离;为期限违法创设程序性法律后果;强化追诉时效期间的时间控制功能;促进时间审查程序走向诉讼化。

In order to ensure the timeliness of the proceedings,different mechanisms for the review and supervision over timeliness involved in procedures,namely（i）the right to speedy trial mode and（ii）the principle of timeliness mode,are developed in common law system and civil law system,respectively.Although there are many differences existing between the two modes,including the conceptual bases on speedy trial,focuses on time points,and roles of judges,timeliness is generally considered as a legal issue protected through judicial review.Timeliness not only respects judges′conscience and logos,but also protects the participation of the defendants in the review mechanism.Based on the similarities on protecting″reasonable time″between the two difference modes,we can review and improve the regulation over timeliness in China′s legal system.The rules regulating timeliness adopt both specific time settings and the abstract speedy trial principle;those rules also realize the control over time for pre-sentence detention and limitation of prosecution.