轻罪治理中的程序性权力扩张及其理性应对  

The Expansion of Procedural Power in Misdemeanor Governance and Its Rational Response

作　　者：詹建红[1] 李清龙 ZHAN Jian-hong;LI Qing-long

机构地区：[1]中南财经政法大学法学院,湖北武汉430073

出　　处：《华侨大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2024年第4期112-120,143,共10页Journal of Huaqiao University(Philosophy & Social Sciences)

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学研究规划基金项目“大数据侦查的程序性控制研究”(22YJA820031)。

摘　　要：目前通过刑事诉讼程序进行轻罪治理的理论和实践,均一定程度上主张扩张程序性权力,“程序工具主义”色彩浓厚。不当的程序性权力扩张潜藏着“象征性程序”现象加剧、程序性控制机能不足以及规范效力的整体受损等风险。对轻罪进行程序治理需立足于程序独立理念,回归刑事诉讼程序的谦抑性,明确治理公权。在划清程序谦抑与程序无为之间界限的基础上,遵循“扩充权利以收缩权力”的总体方向,以阅卷权和异议权为支点对审前程序的谦抑性进行重塑,并围绕公诉审查、证明机制以及权利救济机制对审判程序进行制度完善。At present,misdemeanor governance through criminal proceedings is expanding procedural power to a certain extent,both in theory and practice,and has the color of“program instrumentalism”.Improper expansion of procedural power carries risks such as the aggravation of“symbolic procedures”,insufficient procedural constraints of criminal proceedings and the functional impairment of the effectiveness of relevant procedural norms.The misdemeanor procedural governance needs to be based on the concept of procedural independence,return to the program modest and clarify the governance of public power.On the basis of drawing a clear line between program modest and program inaction,we adhere to the overall direction of“restricting power by expanding rights”,and the right to read files and the right to raise objections will be used as support to reshape the pre-trial program modest.At the same time,the system of trial procedures will be improved around the review of public prosecutions,the proof mechanism,and the rights relief mechanism.

关 键 词：轻罪治理 程序性权力 程序工具主义 程序谦抑性 

分 类 号：D915.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]