死缓复核程序适用问题的检视与修正

Review and Correction of Misunderstandings in the Application of Death Penalty Review Procedure

对于高级人民法院二审维持死缓的案件,在二审程序中同时进行死缓复核是国内法院的一致做法。究其原因,现有立法与司法解释的模糊处理为高级人民法院将两程序合二为一制造空间,1994年《关于审理刑事案件程序的具体规定》中“第二审复核”的规定是两程序合二为一的起点。将两程序合二为一能够有效减少办案压力,并且“重实体、轻程序”的传统刑事司法观阻碍司法办案人员对此做法正当性的思考。死缓复核程序与二审审判程序具有本质区别,并且有独立的程序价值。将两程序合二为一既有损程序正义,也无益于司法公信力。应明确死缓复核程序仅基于中级人民法院“报请”启动,应增加二审开庭率、持续推行正当程序理念以确保二审审判质量。

For cases where the High People’s Court maintains a suspended death sentence in the second instance,it is the consistent practice of the domestic courts to conduct a suspended death penalty review in the second instance procedure.The reason is that the ambiguity of existing legislation and judicial interpretation creates space for the High People’s Court to combine the two procedures into one.The 1994“Specific Provisions on the Procedures for Trial Criminal Cases”stipulating the“second-instance review”became the starting point for the integration of the two procedures.Combining the two procedures into one can effectively reduce the pressure of case handling,and the traditional criminal justice view of“emphasis on entities and less procedures”hinders judicial case handlers from thinking about the legitimacy of this approach.The death penalty review procedure is strictly distinguished from the second instance trial procedure and has independent procedural value.Combining the two procedures into one is neither good to procedural justice nor conducive to judicial credibility.It should be clarified that the death penalty review procedure will no longer be initiated at the second instance stage,the court opening rate of the second instance should be increased,and the concept of due process should be constantly maintained to ensure the quality of the second instance trial.