缺席审判与违法所得没收程序的差异化构建与调适--以节省司法资源与追回国家资产为视角  

The Differential Construction and Adaptation of Absentee Judgment and Illicit Proceeds Forfeiture Procedures--From the Perspective of Conserving Judicial Resources and Recovering State Assets

作　　者：郑英龙[1] 路浩天 Zheng Yinglong;Lu Haotian(School of Law,Zhejiang Gongshang University,Hangzhou 310018)

机构地区：[1]浙江工商大学法学院,杭州310018

出　　处：《浙江社会科学》2024年第7期31-44,156,共15页Zhejiang Social Sciences

基　　金：国家社会科学基金后期资助“推进反腐败治理体系现代化研究”(23FFXB036)的研究成果。

摘　　要：缺席审判程序与违法所得没收程序在主要功能、适用对象上存在明显竞合。同时,二者在竞合的表象后面,在适用案件范围和适用条件上呈现出弱层次性,而在程序性质和证明标准上存在本质差别。缺席审判程序是刑事对人之诉,对案件的证明标准与普通案件无异;违法所得没收程序是对物之诉,带有强烈的民事程序属性,对案件的证明标准相对较低。二者存在的上述差异,尤其在证明标准方面的差异,为司法实践的程序选择适用提供了客观衡量基准。在具体程序选择问题上,检察机关可构建基于政策和法律的二元考量模式。此外,两种程序的竞合关系及存在的证明标准差异也使得二者具有互相转换的理论可行性。立足于当前司法实践和立法现状,可在补全各程序的必备条件后进行程序转换,这不仅可节省司法资源和追回国家资产,也有利于“一体构建追逃防逃追赃机制”。基于诉审关系,两种程序转换的主体应为检察机关。The absentee judgment procedure and the illicit proceeds forfeiture procedure have sig‐nificant overlaps in their main functions and applicable subjects.However,behind this facade of compe‐tition,there is a weak hierarchy in the scope and conditions of application,while there are essential dif‐ferences in the nature of the procedures and the standards of proof.The absentee judgment procedure is a criminal action against a person,with the same standard of proof as ordinary cases;the illicit pro‐ceeds forfeiture procedure is an action against property,with strong civil procedure attributes,and has a relatively lower standard of proof.The aforementioned differences,especially in the standard of proof,provide an objective basis for the selection and application of procedures in judicial practice.On the is‐sue of specific procedural selection,the procuratorial organ can construct a dual consideration model based on policy and law.In addition,the competitive relationship between the two procedures and the existing differences in the standard of proof also make them theoretically feasible for mutual conversion.Based on the current judicial practice and legislative status,procedural conversion can be carried out af‐ter completing the necessary conditions of each procedure,which can not only save judicial resources and recover state assets but also help to“integrate the construction of the mechanism for pursuing,pre‐venting,and recovering stolen goods”.Based on the relationship between prosecution and trial,the sub‐ject of the two procedures’conversion should be the procuratorial organ.

关 键 词：违法所得没收程序 缺席审判程序 对人之诉 对物之诉 证明标准 程序转换 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]