“委托辩护优先于法援辩护”原则的实践异化与消解——兼评《法律援助法》第27条  

The practice alienation and dissolution of the principle of"defense by Commission takes precedence over defense by legal aid"——Comments on Section 27 of the Legal Aid Act

作　　者：曾庆容 ZENG QINGRONG(School of Law Zhongnan University of Economics and Law,Wuhan Hubei 430073,China)

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学法学院,湖北武汉430073

出　　处：《西安电子科技大学学报（社会科学版）》2022年第4期105-112,共8页Journal of Xidian University：Social Science Edition

摘　　要：理论上委托辩护应当优先于法援辩护,2022年《法律援助法》在立法上明确了该原则。实践中,个别案件中仍然存在法援律师“占坑式辩护”的现象,办案机关以被追诉人拒绝委托辩护或已经指派法援辩护为由,阻挠委托辩护律师的介入。其原因主要包括:立法规定不够明确;被追诉人同外界信息沟通不畅;被追诉人存在被客体化的倾向;缺乏完善的救济渠道。应当在委托辩护优先于法援辩护原则的基础上,细化适用规范,明确《法律援助法》第27条规定之“不得限制”“损害”被追诉人委托辩护权的具体情形,将被追诉人近亲属代为委托的辩护人也纳入到该条款的调整范围之内,以防止实践中办案人员错误理解法律,人为地就该原则的实现设置障碍。In theory,a commissioned defense should take precedence over legal aid defense,and the Legal Aid Act 2022 clarifies this principle in legislation.However,in practice,there are still cases in which the case handling organs obstructs the intervention of the entrusted defense lawyers on the grounds that the accused refuses to entrust defense or has appointed legal assistance for defense,resulting in the phenomenon of"pit defense".The reasons mainly include:legislative provisions are not clear enough,the person prosecuted has poor communication with the outside world,the accused person has the tendency to be objectified,and the lack of adequate relief channels.On the basis of the principle that defense entrusting takes precedence over legal aid defense,the applicable norms should be refined to clarify the specific circumstances that"shall not limit"or"damage"the defendant's right to entrusting defense as stipulated in Article 27 of the Legal Aid Law.Defenders entrusted by close relatives of the defendant shall also be included in the adjustment scope of this article,so as to prevent case handling personnel from misunderstanding the law in practice and artificially impeding the realization of the principle.

关 键 词：委托辩护 法援辩护 刑事被追诉人 法律援助 

分 类 号：D915[政治法律—诉讼法学]