論死刑覆核案件中對被告人的法律援助———從《中華人民共和國法律援助法》第25條第1款第5項切入

On Legal Aid to Defendants in Death Penalty Review Cases: From Art. 25. 1. 5 of the Legal Aid Law

對死刑覆核案件中的被告人是否實行強制辯護在理論界一直存在正反不同觀點，《中華人民共和國法律援助法》確立了依申請提供法律援助的“中間路線”，立論之基為死刑覆核引入法律援助確有必要，但死刑覆核程式是不同於一審、二審普通審判的特別救濟程式，可依被告人意願對法律援助的引入方式作適度調整。該法第25 條第1 款第5項規定的死刑覆核法律援助為“法定援助”，第24 條規定的因經濟困難等原因的法律援助為“酌定援助”，兩者性質不同，申請機關、申請事由各異，不應混淆等同。死刑覆核案件中的被告人依申請獲得法律援助只是立法確立的最低要求。司法機關通過司法解釋自增義務，嚴格自律，設定更高法律援助標準，規定高級人民法院覆核死刑案件實行強制辯護有利於保障被告人合法權利。死刑覆核是對被告人程式救濟的最後一道防線，應細化完善告知權利、提出申請以及指派律師等程式設計，進一步保障辯護律師的閱卷權、提出意見權以及程式救濟權。

Theoretically, there have been different views on whether to provide mandatory defense for defendants in death penalty review cases. The Legal Aid Law has established the middle course of providing legal aid on application, which based on a real need for legal aid to be introduced into the death penalty review process, but the death penalty review process is a special relief process different from the first and second trials. The introduction of legal aid can be adjusted appropriately according to the wishes of the defendants. The legal aid for death penalty review provided in Article 25. 1. 5 is statutory aid, which are different from the discretionary aid for defendants with financial difficulties in Article 24 in legal nature, application authorities and application reasons. Therefore, the two should not be confused. Ensuring that defendants in death penalty review cases receive legal aid on application is only the bottomline requirement under the law. The judicial authorities have set a higher standard of legal aid for themselves by issuing judicial interpretations, and this practice of providing for mandatory defense in capital cases reviewed by the High People's Court outside of the legislation is consistent with the judicial autonomy. The death penalty review is the last line of defense for the defendant's procedural relief. The defendant's right to be informed, the right to apply, and the improvement of the procedure design of courtappointed lawyer should be ensured, and lawyers' right to access case files, right to comment and right to procedural relief should be further protected.