Research On Victims’ Participation In Sentencing In Cases Of Admitting Guilt And Admitting Punishment

The system of plea guilty and punished leniency,as a supporting system for the reform of the criminal procedure system centered on trial,is a brand new attempt made by our country in the process of criminal justice reform.This system takes the reasonable allocation of judicial resources and eases the pressure of the public security and judicial organs as the starting point for handling cases,and caters to the judicial status quo of "more cases and fewer people" in my country;at the same time,it is also a manifestation of my country’s criminal policy of combining leniency and strictness.However,we should objectively realize that the system has the problem of "marginalizing" victims who have the status of parties,whether in theory or in practice.Victims wander on the outer edge of the system and cannot truly participate in it..Plead guilty and punished cases are different from general criminal cases.The focus of this type of case is the review and prosecution stage of sentencing consultation.The sentencing recommendations that the prosecutors make to the judicial organs that have a decisive impact on the outcome of the judgment are based on the sentencing agreement of the prosecution and the defense of.Therefore,in such cases,if the victim’s participation in the pretrial sentencing cannot be guaranteed,then other discussions about the protection of the victim’s rights in such cases are empty talk.According to the provisions of current laws and regulations and the operating status of the system of plea guilty and punishing leniency in judicial practice,it can be seen that the victim’s participation in sentencing in such cases presents the following problems: First,the victim does not have a dominant position in this link.This is because once Granting the victim a subjective position in this link will inevitably affect the original intention of the system to pursue the efficiency of litigation.Secondly,the current "Criminal Procedure Law" stipulates that the victim’s participation in sentencing is relatively vague and too formal.The victim only participates in it by "hearing opinions",and there is no clear regulation on the validity of the "opinion".Finally,the relief of objections to the sentencing of victims needs to be improved at both the legislative and judicial levels.By analyzing the problem that it is difficult for victims to truly participate in the sentencing of such cases,it can be concluded that there are two main reasons for this:On the one hand,since the establishment of the system,it has been determined that it is difficult for victims to have a greater voice in it.Since the primary purpose of its establishment is to improve the efficiency of litigation and ease the work pressure of the case-handling agency,the victim’s participation in sentencing will inevitably hinder the progress of the procedure and reduce the efficiency of the litigation of this type of case.Go against the primary goal of the system.On the other hand,the system is the sinicization of the concept of negotiated justice.Under the concept of negotiated justice,both the public prosecution agency and the prosecuted party are undoubtedly the main body of the procedure,and the sentencing negotiation link is the key to determining the efficiency of the procedure;If the victim wants to increase participation in the sentencing process,it will undoubtedly add a third party to the procedure,increase the cost of negotiation,and inevitably contradict the concept of negotiated justice.By analyzing,summarizing and summarizing the existing regulations and the problems and causes in judicial practice,it provides a direction for further improving the victim’s participation in sentencing in such cases.In addition,we should recognize that it is necessary to protect the victim’s participation in the system of sentencing: first,it is the inevitable requirement of the victim’s subject status and the principle of procedural participation;second,it is to ensure that the public prosecutor’s office makes proper sentencing recommendations and trials The need for the agency to make a fair judgment.In such cases,the victim’s participation in sentencing still has many areas that need to be improved.Based on this situation,the author recommends that the protection of the victim’s right to know in the sentencing link can be the first step for improvement.The right to know is the right of all other rights.Basically,only if the victim’s right to know is guaranteed,its true participation in the sentencing link can be realized.Secondly,the victim should be given the right to independently put forward sentencing opinions,change the status quo of the victim dependent on the public prosecution agency in criminal cases,and no longer have the public prosecution agency to "voice" on behalf of the victim.Third,the specific ways for victims to participate in sentencing should be clarified.Not only should they be clearly stipulated at the legislative level,they should also be practical.They can be done in two ways: "menu selection mode" and "victim sentencing opinions." Finally,when the victim’s right to participate in the sentencing process is not guaranteed,the specific remedies should also be systematically stipulated.