职务犯罪调查阶段认罪认罚从宽的探讨——以《监察法》第31条为中心

Discussion on the Leniency on Admission of Guilty and Acceptance of Punishment of Duty Crimes Investigation Stage——Centered on Article 31 of the Supervision Law

职务犯罪案件的认罪认罚从宽由调查阶段的认罪认罚从宽和诉讼阶段的认罪认罚从宽组成。《中华人民共和国监察法》第31条确立调查阶段适用认罪认罚从宽,并对其条件和程序予以规定,相比在诉讼阶段适用认罪认罚从宽要更为严苛。由于在调查阶段与诉讼阶段对认罪认罚从宽的适用存在差别,当两者在对接时就可能产生一些问题。表现在形式性对接是否必然,即监察阶段的认罪认罚从宽是否必然导致在诉讼阶段适用认罪认罚从宽;实质性对接如何处理,即如何保障和落实被追诉人的实体权利,以及是否有必要建立独立的职务犯罪认罪认罚从宽制度。这些问题从不同的角度思考会得到不同的答案,还有待实践的检验,以探索出最适合职务犯罪认罪认罚从宽的发展之路。

The guilty plea of a duty crime case consists of a pleading guilty at the investigation stage and a confession at the litigation stage.Article 31 of the Supervision Law of the People's Republic of China establishes that the conviction of pleading guilty in the investigation stage is lenient and stipulates its conditions and procedures.It is more stringent than the application of guilty plea in the litigation stage.Since there is a difference in the application of pleading guilty in the investigation stage and the litigation stage,there may be some problems when the two are docked.Whether it is inevitable in formal docking,that is,whether the confession of pleading guilty at the monitoring stage necessarily leads to the application of guilty plea in the litigation stage;how to deal with substantive docking,that is,how to protect and implement the substantive rights of the prosecuted;and whether it is necessary to establish an independent duty crime to plead guilty to a lenient system.These questions will have different answers from different perspectives.The most suitable development path for conviction and punishment for duty crimes remains to be explored.