论诉前程序中检察裁量的限度

The Limit of Prosecutorial Discretion during the Pre-litigation Procedure

成果信息
DC信息
传播影响力
本库下载频次:
本库浏览频次:
CNKI下载频次:0

归属学者：

朱福勇

归属院系：

人工智能法学院（应用法学院）

作者：

朱福勇1 ;王成涛 ;张伟鹏 ;陈林

摘要：

基于检察机关的客观义务、检察机关作为公共利益的代表者、诉讼效益、诉权扩张、检察裁量权根据和公平正义目标的考量,在诉前程序中,检察裁量对维护公益、降低行政机关和社会组织的局限性与推进依法履职功效显著。然而,在实践中,由于立法的非圆满性和对检察裁量权的认识不足,检察机关在对"等"的理解、案件线索发现、对造成损害危险的公益的界定、对合理履职期限的把握、对证据的调查核实、行政公益诉讼中证明标准的确定、对行政机关已整改到位的判断等方面存在差异,不可避免地导致裁量尺度不一的现象。为此,需要坚持合法、目的、合理、公开和统一性原则,加快公益诉讼立法进程。在规范公益受损的标准、适当探索"等外"公益诉讼案件和规范检察机关对行政机关是否整改到位的裁量方面,应当积极推进公益诉讼实践创新,健全行政和民事公益诉讼的衔接机制,以及完善配套保障机制,以确保检察裁量权科学、规范地行使。

出版日期：

2021-05-31

学科：

法学

提交日期：

2021-12-16

引用参考：

朱福勇;王成涛;张伟鹏;陈林. 论诉前程序中检察裁量的限度[J]. 应用法学评论,2020(01):25-40.

全文附件授权许可：

知识共享许可协议-署名

  • dc.title
  • 论诉前程序中检察裁量的限度
  • dc.contributor.author
  • 朱福勇;王成涛;张伟鹏;陈林
  • dc.contributor.author
  • School of Artificial Intelligence and Law, Southwest University of Political Science & Law
  • dc.contributor.affiliation
  • 西南政法大学人工智能法学院;山西省晋中市人民检察院;山西省晋中市人民检察院第六检察部
  • dc.publisher
  • 应用法学评论
  • dc.publisher
  • Applied Law Review
  • dc.identifier.year
  • 2020
  • dc.identifier.issue
  • 01
  • dc.identifier.page
  • 25-40
  • dc.date.issued
  • 2021-05-31
  • dc.subject
  • 诉前程序;检察裁量;正当性;权力限度
  • dc.subject
  • Pre-litigation Procedure;Prosecutorial Discretion;Legitimacy;Power Limit
  • dc.description.abstract
  • 基于检察机关的客观义务、检察机关作为公共利益的代表者、诉讼效益、诉权扩张、检察裁量权根据和公平正义目标的考量,在诉前程序中,检察裁量对维护公益、降低行政机关和社会组织的局限性与推进依法履职功效显著。然而,在实践中,由于立法的非圆满性和对检察裁量权的认识不足,检察机关在对"等"的理解、案件线索发现、对造成损害危险的公益的界定、对合理履职期限的把握、对证据的调查核实、行政公益诉讼中证明标准的确定、对行政机关已整改到位的判断等方面存在差异,不可避免地导致裁量尺度不一的现象。为此,需要坚持合法、目的、合理、公开和统一性原则,加快公益诉讼立法进程。在规范公益受损的标准、适当探索"等外"公益诉讼案件和规范检察机关对行政机关是否整改到位的裁量方面,应当积极推进公益诉讼实践创新,健全行政和民事公益诉讼的衔接机制,以及完善配套保障机制,以确保检察裁量权科学、规范地行使。
  • dc.description.abstract
  • In consideration of the Procuratorate's Objective obligation,as a representative of public interest,the litigation benefit,the expansion of the right to appeal,the basis of discretion of the procuratorate and the goal of fairness and justice,during the pre-litigation procedure,the prosecutorial discretion plays an important role in maintaining public welfare,reduce for the limitations of administrative agencies and Social organizations and giving impetus to performing duties legally.However,due to the imperfect legislation and the lack of awareness about prosecutorial discretion,people have different perspectives on the meaning of“and so on”,finding out clues,to the definition of harming the public interest,to the understanding of reasonable period of performing duties,the investigation of evidences,setting standards on administrative public interest litigation,as well as judging whether the executive has rectified and reformed,which leads to inconformity of judgement standard.Because of that,we should adhere to principles of purposiveness,openness,legality,rationality,and uniformity.Meanwhile,we should strengthen legislation of administrative public interest litigation.There are many problems about standardizing the damages to the public interests,exploring public interest litigation case according to“and so on”befittingly,as well as normalizing the opinion that if the procuratorate has a corrective action system in place.In this respect,we should not only actively promote practice and innovation of commonweal litigation,create a sound mechanism for linking administrative litigation with civil litigation,but also improve the guarantee mechanism to ensure that prosecutorial discretion of the procuratorate is exercised scientifically and normatively.
  • dc.description.sponsorship
  • 山西省人民检察院2019年度检察应用理论研究课题“公益诉讼诉前程序中检察裁量权研究”的阶段性成果
  • dc.identifier.if
  • 0
  • dc.subject.discipline
  • D926.3
回到顶部