论文部分内容阅读
我国的公诉审查由过去“实质审查”转向为“形式审查”后,公诉在程序效力上已接近“有诉必审”,而在对不起诉裁量权的五种事后救济程序中,司法救济未取得一席之地,这使我国的司法权在公诉审查阶段未发挥其应有的制约公诉权滥用及排除法官预断、保证集中审理的功能。在考察英、美、德、法、日五国公诉权司法审查制度的基础上,剖析我国立法在该制度配置上的缺陷,提出改革我国公诉权司法审查制度的可行性方案,可以推动我国的司法改革,为刑事诉讼公平、有序和高效率的运作提供保障。
After the review of public prosecution in our country turned from “substantive examination” in the past to “formal examination”, the effectiveness of the prosecution was close to “verdict” in procedural effectiveness, while judicial relief was not obtained in five types of ex post facto relief proceedings As a result, our country’s judicial power has not given full play to its abuse of public prosecution rights and precluded judges’ pre-judgment and guaranteed centralized hearing in the prosecutorial review stage. On the basis of examining the system of judicial review of public prosecutions in Britain, the United States, Germany, France and Japan, this article analyzes the defects of our country’s legislation on the system configuration and puts forward the feasibility plan of reforming the system of judicial review of public prosecution rights in our country, Judicial reform provides a guarantee for the fair, orderly and efficient operation of criminal proceedings.