新加坡暂缓起诉协议制度及其镜鉴

Evaluation and Reflection on the System of Defer Prosecution Agreements of Singapore

新加坡与中国在企业合规不起诉制度的建构上,同为后发型国家。新加坡开展刑事司法改革已四年有余,除在“高盛案”中适用过“有条件警告”制度外,新加坡当局始终保持着谦抑审慎的态度,迟迟未激活暂缓起诉制度,其背后的原因在于伴随着暂缓起诉而存在的“两极分化的司法体系”以及缺乏司法制衡的检察裁量权对于该国法治有着潜在威胁。鉴于新加坡的相关经验,我国在后续的企业合规改革中,在警惕刑事合规万能主义之余,还须回应法律面前人人平等的现实观照,加强对检察裁量权的制约。具体来说,应作好行政监管与刑事合规的模式选择与协调衔接,审慎推进以检察机关为主导的涉案企业合规改革,并明确法院在刑事合规中的角色定位。

Same as China,Singapore is a late-developing country in the construction of corporate compliance non-prosecution system.It has been over four years since Singapore launched the enterprise criminal compliance reform.Apart from the application of the“conditional warning”in the case of the Goldman Sachs Group Inc,Singapore Attorney General s Chambers has always maintained a rather modest prudent attitude and has not activated the DPAs system.The underlying reason lies in the potential threat to the rule of law caused by“two-tiered justice system”accompanied by defer prosecution and procuratorial discretion with the lack of judicial balance.From the perspective of Singapore experience,in the follow-up enterprise compliance reform,China should not only be vigilant the omnipotence of criminal compliance,but also respond to the realistic requirement of legal equality,then strengthen the restriction on procuratorial discretion.Specifically,China should do well in the mode selection and coordination of administrative supervision and criminal compliance,and prudently promote the enterprise compliance reform led by procuratorial organs,then clarify the role of the court in enterprise criminal compliance.