我国认罪认罚从宽制度中控、辩、审三方法律关系研究——以分析实证法学为视角的考察

On the Legal Relationship among Prosecution, Defense and Court Trial in the Leniency System of Pleading Guilty and Punishment in China——An Investigation from the Perspective of Analytic Positive Jurisprudence

当前学界疏于对认罪认罚从宽制度中被追诉人、检察机关与法院之间基本法律关系的研究。从霍菲尔德法律关系理论分析,整个制度的骨架理应由“被追诉人—检察机关”“被追诉人—法院”“检察机关—法院”以及“法院—检察机关”这四对法律关系构成。被追诉人的认罪认罚权是整个程序运行的起点和中心,刑诉法第15条之“可以”应理解为“应当”。当前立法偏重于通过检察机关之量刑建议权来实现被追诉人的认罪认罚权,这一设计既忽略了后者的核心地位,也未能正视法院同样作为从宽义务承担者的主体资格。因此,未来的制度运作既要重视被追诉人因认罪认罚权而衍生的各项权利和特权,也应补充规定在检察机关怠于履职情况下,法院应当享有对程序适用的审查决定权。

The current legislative design and academic research lack of a correct understanding of the legal relationship between the accused, the prosecution and the court in the leniency system of guilty plea. From the analysis of Hohfeld’s legal relationship theory, the framework of the whole system is composed of four pairs of legal relations, namely, “the accused versus prosecution ”, “the accused versus court”, “the prosecution versus court” and “the court versus prosecution ”. The “can” stipulated in Article 15 should be understood as the “must”, and “the right to plead guilty” in fact is the core and starting point of the whole system. At present, legislation focuses on the realization of the right to plead guilty and accept punishment by the sentencing suggestion power of prosecution. This design both ignores the core position of the latter and fails to face the court’s main qualification as the fulfilling duty bearer. Therefore, the future operation of the system should not only emphasize the self-realization of the right of the accused to plead guilty, but also provide that the court should have the right to review and decide the opening of the procedure when the prosecution is slack in performing its duties.