刑事缺席审判与判决前财产没收程序适用关系研究

The Applicative Relationship Between Trial by Default and Confiscation Before Judgement

刑事缺席审判程序是应对因涉嫌贪污贿赂等犯罪的犯罪嫌疑人、被告人潜逃境外无法进行刑事追诉难题的程序创新,其创设具有对外宣示和对内回应双重价值。这一程序与判决前财产没收程序存在适用范围的竞合。刑事缺席审判程序覆盖事项全面、规范解释优先和裁判效力权威的优势,决定了其效力位阶高于判决前财产没收程序。但在具体适用中,当二者存在适用空间模糊时,由于判决前财产没收程序在裁判稳定性和可执行性方面的优势,应当优先适用判决前财产没收程序。

Trial by default is a procedural innovation to solve the problem that the defenders,who are suspected of crimes of corruption and terror,but who are absconding abroad and can't be prosecuted. It is valuable for announcement abroad and responding inland. Its scope of application overlaps with that of confiscation before judgment. Trial by default can deal with a more comprehensive matter. It is advantaged in explanation of rules and the authority of procedural efficiency. Thus trial by default has the prior level to confiscation before judgement. However,based on the advantages of the stability and the execution of judgements,confiscation before judgement should be applied preferentially when there is some confusion in the scope of application.