国际中文开源期刊平台

从“力征”走向“和合”：论本土协商性司法的文化根基

From “Force” to “Harmony”: On the Cultural Roots of Local Consultative Justice

刑事司法科学与治理 / 2024,5(2)：86-97 / 2024-08-29 189 166

查看全文 下载文档

• 作者： 吕嘉博     
• 单位：

  内蒙古大学法学院，呼和浩特

• 关键词： “和合”思想；实质正义；协商性司法；控辩协商
• “Harmony” ideology; Substantive justice; Consultative justice; Prosecution and defense consultation
• 摘要： 一种观点认为，本土司法文化崇尚“真实发现”与“实质正义”，这与协商性司法所奉行的“商定正义”相悖，故协商性司法本土文化土壤阙如，本土建设难度极大。但这一观点实则漏洞百出，中华文化“尚和”，追求国家社会与个人能够达成“和合”的理想状态，而协商性司法能够“息讼止争”，如此与本土文化相符相合。同时，“实质正义”与所谓“商定正义”之间也非“水火不容”，与最清楚真相之被追诉人合作有利于“真实发现”，立足于个别刑罚论开展量刑协商亦是“罚当其罪”的表现，故不违“实质正义”。基于协商性司法与传统司法文化相合之部分，有必要继续深入研究“和合”思想在司法层面之追求，以明确协商性司法的当代价值，探寻其中国展开的正确路径。最后，立足于本土文化与当前制度，拟提出一种由利益无涉之检察官主导，由消极法官见证，符合程序正义下三方构造的控辩协商模式。
• One view is that the local judicial culture advocates “real discovery” and “substantive justice”, which is also contrary to the “agreed justice” pursued by consultative justice, so the local culture of consultative justice is lacking, and it is extremely difficult to build the local area. However, this view is actually full of loopholes, Chinese culture is “peaceful”, pursuing the ideal state of “harmony” between the country, society and individuals, and consultative justice can “settle litigation and stop disputes”, which is in line with local culture. At the same time, the relationship between “substantive justice” and the so-called “consensual justice” is not “incompatible”, and cooperating with the prosecuted person who knows the truth best is conducive to “true discovery”, and carrying out sentencing negotiations based on individual punishment theories is also a manifestation of “punishment appropriate to the crime”, so it does not violate “substantive justice”. Based on the convergence between consultative justice and traditional judicial culture, it is necessary to continue to study the pursuit of the idea of “harmony” at the judicial level, so as to clarify the contemporary value of consultative justice and explore the correct path for its development in China. Finally, based on the local culture and the current system, it is proposed to propose a prosecution and defense negotiation model led by prosecutors with no interests and witnessed by passive judges, which is in line with the tripartite structure under procedural justice.
• DOI： https://doi.org/10.35534/cjsg.0502011
• 引用： 吕嘉博．从“力征”走向“和合”：论本土协商性司法的文化根基［J］．刑事司法科学与治理，2024，5（2）：86-97．