刑事发回重审制度论纲——以刑事诉讼法修正案草案第八十三条为样本的分析  

Research on the Criminal Retrial System——An Analytical Study Based on Article 83 of the Draft Amendment to the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China

作　　者：张元鹏[1] 李寿荣[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民公安大学,北京100038

出　　处：《南阳师范学院学报》2012年第4期36-39,共4页Journal of Nanyang Normal University

基　　金：中国人民公安大学学生科研创新项目课题"刑事发回重审制度研究"的结项研究成果;课题编号(11SKB001)

摘　　要：新草案对二审中的发回重审仅仅提到了一点,即限制因事实不清证据不足而发回重审的次数。通过比较分析草案前后对发回重审的不同规定,并结合草案和现行刑诉法关于二审中发回重审的规定分析了发回重审存在的矛盾,最后提出了自己关于二审中发回重审的修改意见:科学规定发回重审的原因,严格限定发回重审的次数,明确提出对发回重审的要求。In the second instance of Chinese criminal procedure,the remanding of a case to the original court for retrial is always a debatable subject.The new draft amendment touches upon just one point regarding the issue of remanding a case for retrial in proceedings at second instance,that is,to limit the number of times of remanding cases where the facts are unclear and the evidence is insufficient.On the basis of analyzing different stipulations regarding remanding cases for retrial before and after the draft amendment took effect,and in light of the respective prescriptions on remanding cases for retrial in proceedings at second instance between the draft amendment and the ongoing criminal procedure law,this paper holds a discussion on the conflicts or contradictions in the process of remanding cases for retrial.In the end,proposed changes for remanding cases for retrial at second instance are made,such as,the reasons for remanding cases for retrial should be scientifically stipulated;the number of times of remanding should be strictly reined in;and the requirements for remanding must be explicitly formulated.

关 键 词：刑事诉讼法 发回重审 修改草案 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]