訴訟分流背景下刑事速裁程式評判

在認罪認罰從寬原則指導下，以效率為指向的刑事速裁程式的設置存在體系性缺失，不具有獨立性品格。一方面，實務中有用其取代認罪認罰從寬制度的傾向；另一方面，它與刑事簡易程式的適用界限不清、規則不明。德國的刑事處罰令制度承擔了刑事訴訟程式中大量的分流功能，它以“書面審”的模式快速處理輕微刑事案件，強調檢法兩家意見的一致性，法院不得更改檢察院的處刑建議。伴隨著我國較重行政違法行為逐步入罪化的實體法處理模式的興起，有必要借鑒德國刑事處罰令的有益經驗，打造我國輕罪刑事案件的“書面審”速裁模式，讓其“合法地”大量分擔刑事訴訟程式繁簡分流的功能，並以此助推實體法中輕重罪案件的劃分及分層級的值班律師指定辯護制度的建立。

Under the guidance of the principle of criminal leniency, the efficiency-oriented fast-track criminal trial procedure is systematically lacking and does not have an independent character. On the one hand, the use of the fast-track criminal trial procedure has in practice replaced the understanding of the criminal leniency system; on the other hand, its application boundary with criminal simplified procedure is unclear and the rules are unknown. The German criminal penalty orders have assumed a wide range of diversion functions in the criminal procedure. It uses the ''written trial'' mode to quickly deal with misdemeanour cases. It emphasizes the consistency of opinions of the prosecutor and the court, and the court must not change the prosecutor’s sentence proposal. As the heavier administrative violations in China are gradually considered to be crimes, it is necessary to learn from the useful experience of German criminal penalty orders. We can create a speedy mode of ''written trial'' for misdemeanour cases so that it can ''legally'' share the function of diversion in proceeding and help to distinguish between misdemeanour and felony cases in criminal law and establish a hierarchical defence system for the incumbent lawyer.