认罪认罚案件中的“检察主导”:运作特征、归因逻辑与规范路径

“Procuratorial Leading”in Cases of Confession of Guilt for Leniency:Operational Characteristics,Attribution Logic and Normative Path

与非认罪认罚案件相比,检察机关在认罪认罚案件处理体系中的主导范围从审前主导延伸到全程主导,主导内容从程序主导扩大到“程实”共导,主导方式从单向对抗变为双向协商,主导效力从主要参考变为实际影响。检察机关主导作用的增强,引发学界对检察主导侵犯审判职能的担忧,进而延伸到对认罪认罚从宽与“以审判为中心”两大诉讼制度之间关系的争论。“以审判为中心”强调“以审判职能为中心”,认罪认罚从宽制度有助于实现“简案快审”“繁案精审”,与“以审判职能为中心”的核心要求相契合。检察机关在认罪认罚案件中发挥主导作用,减轻审判人员在定罪量刑方面的负担,正是保障审判职能优化实施的必然要求。此外,检察主导强调“责任”,而非“权力”,为避免主导变为“包办”,仍需加强审判机关对检察机关的制约,加大实质审查;构建新型控辩关系,保障协商过程实质化;完善检察职权实施,提升主导作用的规范性。

Compared with the ordinary criminal cases,the leading scope of the procuratorial organs in the handling system of confession cases extends from the pre-trial procedure to the whole process,the leading content expands from the procedure matters to the“procedure and substantive”matters,the leading way changes from one-way confrontation to two-way negotiation,and the leading effect changes from the main reference to the actual influence.The enhancement of the leading role of the procuratorial organs has aroused the concern of the academic circles about the infringement of the trial function by the procuratorial leading,and then extended to the debate on the relationship between the leniency of pleading guilty and punishment and the“trial centered”litigation systems.“Taking trial as the center”emphasizes“taking trial function as the center”,and the leniency system of pleading guilty and punishment helps to realize“quick trial of simple cases”and“intensive trial of complex cases”,which is consistent with the core requirements of“taking trial function as the center”.Procuratorial organs play a leading role in the cases of confession of guilt for leniency,reduce the burden of judges in conviction and sentencing,which is the inevitable requirement to ensure the fair implementation of the trial function.In addition,the procuratorial leading emphasizes“responsibility”rather than“power”.It is still necessary to strengthen the restriction of the judicial organ on the procuratorial organ and increase the substantive examination.Build a new relationship between the prosecution and the defense to ensure the substantive negotiation process.Improve the implementation of procuratorial powers and enhance the standardization of the leading role.