撤回起诉作酌定不起诉的实证检视与制度矫正  

Empirical Examination and Institutional Improvement of Discretionary Non-Prosecution after the Prosecution Withdrawal

作　　者：兰楠 LAN Nan

机构地区：[1]最高人民检察院,北京100726

出　　处：《政治与法律》2025年第4期51-64,共14页Political Science and Law

摘　　要：撤回起诉后能否作酌定不起诉决定,理论与实务一直存在争议。实证考察发现,撤回起诉与酌定不诉的“组合”实际被用于回避无罪判决,导致控审职能混同、认识分歧搁置、损害被告人利益,影响司法公正和程序安定。针对无罪和疑罪的撤回起诉是检察官法定义务的延伸,不以起诉便宜主义或检察裁量权为理论基础;轻罪的诉讼系属已在法院,失去检察裁量时机。撤回起诉应当限定于高效矫正错误、保护人权的功用。针对事后个案监督普遍失灵的问题,应通过刑事诉讼法的修改限定适用情形、强化对撤回起诉的实体和程序审查。The question of whether discretionary non-prosecution may be applied after the withdrawal of prosecution has long been debated in both theory and practice.Empirical studies reveal that the combined application of prosecution withdrawal and discretionary non-prosecution is often utilized to circumvent acquittal judgments,which leads to confusion of prosecutorial and adjudicative functions,the shelving of judicial disagreements,infringement of defendants'rights,thus undermining judicial fairness and procedural stability.The withdrawal of prosecution in cases involving innocence or doubtful guilt constitutes an extension of the prosecutor's statutory duty,rather than being grounded in principles of prosecutorial expediency or prosecutorial discretion.For minor offenses,since jurisdiction has shifted to courts,the opportunity for prosecutorial discretion lapses.The withdrawal of prosecution should be confined to its intended purpose of efficiently correcting errors and safeguarding human rights.To address the frequent inadequacy of post-hoc case-by-case supervision,amendments to the Criminal Procedure Law should be enacted to delineate applicable circumstances and enhance substantive and procedural review of prosecution withdrawal.

关 键 词：撤回起诉 法定义务 诉讼系属 酌定不起诉 

分 类 号：DF73[政治法律—诉讼法学]