Research On The Role Of Prosecutors In The Perspective Of Sentencing Negotiation

The role of prosecutors in criminal proceedings has changed greatly since the Criminal Procedure Law confirmed the admission of guilt and acceptance of punishment in 2018.After the establishment of this,prosecutors were required to actively negotiate sentences and then receive responses from various subjects in the criminal proceedings,with prosecutors playing multiple roles,including prosecutor,negotiator and adjudicator.In terms of Role theory,prosecutors are in the midst of a conflict of roles.At the same time,prosecutors themselves are affected by various subjects in sentencing negotiations.Therefore,this article provides a bit of deep analysis of prosecutors in sentencing negotiations by drawing on role theory and applying the logical analytical framework of role conflict theory.In addition to a bit of deep analysis of the current situation and causes of role conflict for prosecutors,the paper draws on the institutional design of major legal systems around the world and proposes feasible ways to mitigate role conflict at three levels:"role philosophy,role obligations and role constraints".The paper is divided into five parts.The first part briefly introduces the concept of sentencing consultation and the role of the prosecutor in it.Firstly,the concept of sentencing consultation is clarified and distinguished from other related concepts.Secondly,the role of the prosecutor in sentencing consultation is clarified,including the negotiator,adjudicator and prosecutor.The second part focuses on the acts committed by prosecutors in sentencing consultations and the responses received.These include:the failure to safeguard the voluntariness of the person being prosecuted and the exercise of the right of appeal by the person being prosecuted;the powerful effect of the sentencing recommendation,resulting in the refusal of the judge to adopt the sentencing recommendation;the neglect of the victim’s claims and the disobedience of the victim to the sentencing recommendation.The third section focuses on the role conflicts that can arise for prosecutors in sentencing negotiations,including inter-role and intra-role conflicts.The former includes conflicts between the roles of ’prosecutor’ and ’adjudicator’ and between ’prosecutor’ and’negotiator’.The latter includes conflicts between the role of the guardian of objectivity and impartiality and the role of the parties to criminal proceedings.The fourth part draws on the USA and Germany,the representative countries of the common law and civil law systems.In America,plea bargaining takes many forms and prosecutors have great discretion.In Germany,a multi-tiered criminal negotiation system has been established and prosecutors have indirectly established a dominant role in criminal negotiations.Drawing on the experience of foreign countries,Part V proposes feasible ways to mitigate role conflict at three levels:"role concept-role obligation-role constraint".Firstly,prosecutors should uphold the concept of restorative justice in sentencing negotiations and actively facilitate the participation of victims in sentencing negotiations and the restoration of victims’ interests.New prosecutors’ duty of equal consultation and litigation care in sentencing negotiations,and then upholding a neutral review position.In addition,prosecutors should also actively break through the shackles of criminal litigation constructionism and increase their early intervention to improve the efficiency of the plea-bargaining system and the sentencing negotiation process.