智能量刑算法决策与刑事自由裁量权的差异与融合  

Differences and Integration of Intelligent Sentencing Algorithm Decision-making and Criminal Discretion

作　　者：李立丰[1] 齐弋博 Li Lifeng;Qi Yibo(School of Law,Jilin University,Changchun 130000,China)

机构地区：[1]吉林大学法学院,长春130000

出　　处：《科技与法律（中英文）》2022年第1期10-17,共8页Science Technology and Law（Chinese-English Version）

基　　金：吉林大学横向课题“关于监察体制改革背景下的职务犯罪公务研究:以ZJ省检察实践为范本的实证研究”(TY2019-FW129-ZFCG129)。

摘　　要：人工智能量刑系统的应用为刑事司法领域带来诸多便利,提高了司法效率,实现"类案同判"。人工智能量刑系统是以数据模型运算为工作原理,通过逻辑运算形成算法决策。刑事自由裁量权是为了实现个案正义而赋予法官的裁判权力。智能量刑算法决策与刑事自由裁量权不仅价值立场不同,在事实认定、法律适用和权力属性上也有区别,但两者之间可以形成一种相辅相成的关系。为了避免法官量刑的"恣意性"和智能量刑系统的"机械性",应当在量刑规范化改革目标要求下,首先,坚持法官在量刑中的主导地位;其次,明确算法决策介入司法领域的边界;最后,坚持以人为本,构建人机协同的司法治理新模式。The application of artificial intelligence sentencing system brings many conveniences to the field of criminal justice,improves judicial efficiency and realizes“consistent judgement in similar cases”.Artificial intelligence sentencing system takes data model operation as the working principle,and forms algorithm decision-making through logical operation.Criminal discretion is the judicial power given to judges in order to achieve justice in individual cases.Intelligent sentencing algorithm decision-making and criminal discretion are not only different in value position,but also different in fact finding,law application and power attribute.Moreover,they maintain a complementary relationship.In order to avoid the arbitrariness of judges’ sentencing and the mechanization of intelligent sentencing system,we should highlight sentencing reform objectives and requirements.First of all,adhere to the judge leading position in sentencing.Secondly,define the boundary of algorithmic decision-making intervention in the judicial field.Finally,adhere to people-oriented and build a new judicial governance model of man-machine cooperation.

关 键 词：人工智能量刑 算法决策 法官量刑 刑事自由裁量权 人机协同 

分 类 号：D924[政治法律—刑法学]