法治反腐视域下刑事缺席审判证明标准的完善路径  

The Improvement Path of Proof Standards for Criminal Absentee Trials from the Perspective of Rule of Law and Anti Corruption

作　　者：王译 朱佩琳 Wang Yi;Zhu Peilin(Xiangtan University,Xiangtan 411105,China)

机构地区：[1]湘潭大学,湖南湘潭411105

出　　处：《湖北警官学院学报》2024年第1期126-137,共12页Journal of Hubei University of Police

基　　金：国家重点研发计划重点专项“智慧司法科学理论与司法改革科技支撑技术研究”(2020YFC832400);湖南省教育厅党的二十大精神研究专项“在法治轨道上全面建设社会主义现代化国家研究”(23B1142)。

摘　　要：作为2018年《刑事诉讼法》新增内容,刑事缺席审判程序填补了没收违法所得程序适用上的局限,扩展了特定犯罪的追诉方式,完善了具有中国特色的刑事审判制度。该程序尽管纾解了客观上不能出席导致的审判停滞情况,但被告人外逃型缺席审判的适用仍有待立法的完善。当前,缺席审判规则中的证明标准未能与案件的特殊性相协调。缺席审判的证明标准应围绕犯罪构成要件理论,通过厘清三类案件的特殊诉讼构造,明确证明对象、证明方式、证明价值和证明目的之特殊性,充分发挥刑事缺席审判的价值功能。As a new addition to the 2018 Criminal Procedure Law,the criminal in absentia trial procedure fills the space for the application of the confiscation of illegal proceeds procedure,expands the recourse for specific criminal offenses,and improves the criminal trial system with Chinese characteristics.Although this procedure has alleviated the stagnation of trials caused by the objective inability to attend,it still needs to be improved by legislation in the case of in ab-sentia trials where the defendant has fled the country.Currently,the standard of proof in the rules for trials in absentia fails to harmonize with the specificity of the case.The standard of proof for trials in absentia should be centered on the theory of the elements of a crime,and by clarifying the special litigation structure of the three types of cases,the object of proof,mode of proof,value of proof,and the purpose of proof should be made clear,so as to give full play to the value of the function of the criminal trial in absentia.

关 键 词：缺席审判 对席审理 证明标准 违法所得没收 跨境追逃追赃 

分 类 号：D915[政治法律—诉讼法学]