A Study On The Estoppel Right Of The Accused In The Leniency System Of Admitting Guilt And Accepting Punishment

The rules of Pleas of Guilty and Acceptance of Punishment has already become an important content that cannot be ignored in the criminal procedure of our country.However,in some cases in practice,the system spirit of "consultation" and "consensus" should have been embodied,but due to the unequal status of the prosecution and defense,it has turned into submission to power doctrine.In order to improve this situation,the"Guiding Opinions on the Application of the rules of Pleas of Guilty and Acceptance of Punishment" issued in October 2019 and the latest"Criminal Procedure Law" judicial interpretation issued in January 2021 have proposed solutions to some problems.However,there are no detailed regulations on the relevant content and procedural guarantees of the right of estoppel.In addition,in judicial practice,it is not an exception that the prosecutor pleads guilty to his punishment and repents.Therefore,the system content of the estoppel right of the prosecutor should be improved as soon as possible.Not only can further complement the legitimate litigation rights of the defendant,but also help guide the judiciary to respond fairly and reasonably to changes in litigation procedures caused by the defendant’s repentance.The main body of this article is divided into four parts:The first part mainly introduces the basic theory of the prosecutor’s right to repent.First,explain the connotation of the right of estoppel,and make a basic definition of this right.Secondly,to discuss the design and protection of a certain right,the first step must be to demonstrate the legitimacy of its existence,and to prove that the right of estoppel has a legitimacy basis for its existence,and then it is possible to discuss the follow-up content in detail.The second part combines the judicial practice of Pleas of Guilty and Acceptance of Punishment,and puts forward the existing problems of the prosecutor’s exercise of the right to repent.This article divides the existing problems into three perspectives for analysis.First,in actual cases of confession and punishment,why are some of the prosecutors afraid to exercise the right to repent?Second,the accused abused the right of estoppel in order to achieve improper purposes,resulting in a waste of judicial resources.Third,the legal position of the defender in the case of confession and punishment is embarrassing.The third part turns the perspective to related foreign systems,examining the guilty plea and reply system in the American plea bargaining,the confession and confession under the negotiated justice in Germany,and the guilty confession and repentance in the guilty confession negotiation system in Taiwan,and the construction of the right to repent in my country Contents such as the conditions for exercising the right of estoppel at different stages of litigation and whether the defendant’s right to appeal should be restricted have certain reference significance.The fourth part puts forward the corresponding improvement suggestions for the existing problems of the right to estoppel.First of all,regarding the issue of the prosecutor’s fear of exercising the right of estoppel,we should start with the three aspects of eliminating the retaliatory protests of the procuratorial organ,the evidence effectiveness of the confirmation of the confession of punishment and the evasion of the estoppel procedure to reduce the prosecutor’s remorse.Judicial risk.Secondly,in order to solve the problem of the abuse of the right of estoppel,the right of estoppel should be reasonably restricted by regulating the stage of the exercise of rights,legal consequences and justified reasons.Finally,the legal status of the defender should be maintained by recognizing the defender’s independent defense status,strengthening the defender’s effective defense in The rules of Pleas of Guilty and Acceptance of Punishment,and establishing effective defense evaluation standards.