刑事再审抗诉实证研究——以360份裁判文书为样本  

An Empirical Research of Criminal Retrial Counter-appeals:take the Analysis of 360 Judgment Documents as an Example

作　　者：李辞[1] 纪凯雄 LI Ci;JI Kaixiong(Law School,Fuzhou University,Fuzhou,Fujian,China,350108)

机构地区：[1]福州大学法学院,福建福州350108

出　　处：《贵州大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第6期87-100,共14页Journal of Guizhou University(Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金一般项目“慎诉刑事政策下公诉模式转型研究”(22BFX056)。

摘　　要：刑事抗诉是检察机关法律监督工作的重要组成部分,逐渐成为刑事审判监督格局的中心。司法实践中,适用法律错误与量刑错误是检察机关提起再审抗诉的主要理由。从再审抗诉结果上看,绝大多数抗诉意见都得到法院支持;从再审抗诉质量上看,检察机关对实体性问题提出再审抗诉的质量高于对程序性问题的抗诉质量;从再审抗诉功能的实践样态上看,再审抗诉的追诉色彩浓厚,纠错功能突出,检察机关的中立地位偏移,监督属性不足。检察机关应回归客观中立立场,严格控制不利于被告人再审抗诉的提起,实现再审抗诉“实体+程序”双轮驱动,提升再审抗诉工作质效。Criminal counter-appeal is an important part of the legal supervision work of the procuratorial authority,which has gradually become the focus of the criminal trial supervision system.In judicial practice,law application errors and sentencing errors are the main reasons for procuratorial authority to initiate retrial counter-appeals.From the results of retrial counter-appeals,the vast majority of opinions are supported by the courts.Looking at the quality of retrial counter-appeals,the procuratorial authority’s quality in raising substantive issues for retrial counter-appeals is higher than that on procedural issues.Regarding the practical state of the function of retrial counter-appeals,there is a strong sense of prosecution,with a prominent error correction function,a deviation from the neutral position of the procuratorial organs,and insufficient supervisory attributes.Through empirical research,it is suggested that procuratorial authority should return to an objective and neutral position,strictly control the initiation of retrial counter-appeals that are not favorable to the defendants,achieve a dual-drive of“substantive+procedural”for retrial counter-appeals,and enhance the quality and effectiveness of it.

关 键 词：刑事再审程序 刑事再审抗诉 审判监督程序 法律监督 检察官客观义务 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]