审判监督程序的实践合理性及其法定化——基于《刑事诉讼法司法解释》第472条第1款第四项之分析  

Practical Rationality and Legalization of Procedure for Trial Supervision

作　　者：张建伟[1] Zhang Jianwei

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《中国应用法学》2023年第6期155-168,共14页China Journal of Applied Jurisprudence

摘　　要：审判监督程序与第一审、第二审程序审理的直接对象存在差异,即使依法“依照”审理也不可忽视其程序间的差异,但是司法实践中将审判监督程序与第一审、第二审程序有所混同是常见现象。依照第二审程序进行的审判监督程序一旦判决或者裁定之后,全案应处于“终审”状态,不发生指令下级人民法院再依第一审程序重新审理的问题,就此言之,《刑事诉讼法司法解释》第472条第1款第四项对于事实不清、证据不足的案件撤销原判、发回重审的规定,存在法律依据供给不足的问题。这一司法解释,具有一定的实践合理性,但也造成重新审判适用的一审程序与审判监督程序二者关系的疑惑,甚至造成正在服刑中的受刑人执行依据被撤销而其仍在服刑的实践困境。值得肯定的是,这一司法解释的程序价值,是为被判决人提供了针对不利于自己的再审改判的上诉机会。这种上诉机会可以通过发回重审或者对审判监督程序进行改造。有两种方案可供选择:一是在审判监督程序的法律规定中增加撤销原判、交付一审的制度,并限定为对被告人不利再审的情形;二是针对不利于被告人的再审情形,设置作为审判监督程序组成部分的特别上诉程序,由此彰显审判监督程序不同于原一审程序、二审程序的独立性,在未来修改刑事诉讼法中,解决具有合理精神内核的司法实践的法定化问题,实现这种司法中变通做法与法律规定的协调一致。There are differences between the trial supervision procedure and the first and second instance procedures,the differences between the procedures cannot be ignored.However,it is a common phenomenon in judicial practice to confuse the trial supervision procedure with the first and second instance procedures.Once a judgment or ruling is made in the trial supervision procedure conducted in accordance with the second instance procedure,the entire case should be in a"final"state,and there should be no issue of instructing the lower level people's court to try again in accordance with the first instance procedure.In this regard,the provisions of Article 472(4)of the Interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Law of the Supreme People's Court regarding the revocation of the original judgment or remand of cases with unclear facts and insufficient evidence pose a legal dilemma.This judicial interpretation has caused confusion about the relationship between the first instance procedure and the trial supervision procedure applicable to the retrial,and has also caused practical difficulties in the lack of execution basis for prisoners who are currently serving sentences.It is worth affirming that the procedural value of this judicial interpretation is to provide the sentenced person with an opportunity to appeal against retrial and sentencing that is not conducive to them.However,this opportunity for appeal can be achieved not only by sending back for retrial,but also by reforming the trial supervision procedures.There are two options to choose from.One is to add the system of revoking the original judgment and restoring the first instance in the legal provisions of the trial supervision procedure,which can be limited to situations that are unfavorable to the defendant for retrial;The second is to establish a special appeal procedure as a component of the trial supervision procedure in response to situations such as retrial that are not conducive to the defendant,thereby enhancing the independence of the trial supervision proc

关 键 词：审判监督程序 司法解释 实践合理性 直接审理对象 《刑事诉讼法》修改 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]