速裁程序被告人上诉限制问题研究  

Research on the Restriction of the Defendant′s Appeal in Expedite Procedure

作　　者：孙晋玮 SUN Jinwei(School of Law,Jilin University,Changchun Jilin 130012,China)

机构地区：[1]吉林大学法学院,吉林长春130012

出　　处：《江苏科技大学学报(社会科学版)》2025年第1期36-42,50,共8页Journal of Jiangsu University of Science and Technology(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：国家社科基金项目“司法适用中的犯罪构成问题研究”(23BFX128)。

摘　　要：随着上诉影响速裁程序及相关制度设立初衷的实现,学界对此开始出现限制速裁程序被告人上诉的主张。从上诉的规则定位与意义出发,限制上诉应遵循保证前置程序充分正义性的逻辑。同样作为简易快速判决程序的日本即决程序,从程序设置和实体科刑两个方面对被告人权利进行充分保障,因而限制被告人上诉权的立法符合上诉限制的基本逻辑。在我国的速裁程序中,被告人诉讼地位处于弱势,由于对其辩护权保护不足,相关诉讼制度也并不完善,不符合上诉权限制的逻辑要求,因而不应限制速裁程序中被告人的上诉权。Due to the impact on the original goals of the expedited procedure and its related systems,academic discourse has begun to propose restricting the right of appeal for defendants subjected to such procedures.From the perspective of the normative function and purpose of appeals,the fundamental logic behind restricting appellate rights lies in ensuring sufficient procedural justice at the preliminary stage.The expedited procedure in Japan,which similarly aims for simplified and efficient procedure,exemplifies this logic:it provides comprehensive safeguards for the defendant's rights both procedurally and substantively,thereby justifying restrictions on the right to appeal.In contrast,under China's expedited procedure,defendants are in a relatively disadvantaged position,with inadequate protection of their right to defense and underdeveloped procedural safeguards.These deficiencies fall short of the necessary conditions for restricting appellate rights.Therefore,limiting the right of appeal for defendants under China’s expedited procedure lacks normative justification and should not be adopted.

关 键 词：速裁程序 被告人诉讼权利 即决裁判程序 认罪认罚从宽 

分 类 号：D915.3[政治法律—诉讼法学]