刑事裁判文書繁簡分流問題研究

A Study on Distinguishing between Formal and Simplified Versions of Criminal Judgement Documents

實現裁判文書繁簡分流是最高人民法院《四五改革綱要》提出的一項改革任務。刑事裁判文書繁簡分流的根本原因，是目前我國刑事裁判文書同質化現象比較嚴重，與刑事訴訟法規定的多元化審判程序不匹配，需要說理的沒有充分深入說理，不需要深入說理的也得“八股文式”地列舉“裁判理由”，導致“繁者不繁、簡者不簡”，不利於司法資源的優化配置。“控辯雙方在審判中的對抗程度”是審判程序、裁判文書繁簡分流的決定因素，審判程序類型是決定刑事裁判文書繁簡分流的直接標準。要式裁判文書適用於“對抗式審判程序”，應當格式規範，要素齊全，而且必須進行充分深入的釋法說理。“簡式裁判文書”適用於“合意式審判程序”，其釋法說理以簡單的形式進行，一般不需要長篇大論式地闡述裁判理由，只要把有關事項，特別是對“認罪認罰”“控辯協議”等事情進行真實的記載，就是在為裁判主文闡述理由。

It is a reform task provided in The Summary of the Fourth Five-Year Reform of People's Court to distinguish the formal and simplified versions of criminal judgement documents. The underlying reason is that, increasingly, homogenized criminal judgement documents cannot match the diversified criminal procedures, which results in an improper simplification or complication of criminal judgement documents and a waste of judicial resources. To set the standard for distinguishing criminal judgement documents, the types of cases and the corresponding criminal procedure should be taken into account. The degree of confrontation between the plaintiff and defendant should be the determining factor in distinguishing between the different versions of criminal judgements and criminal trial procedures. The type of criminal trial procedure should be the immediate standard for the use of criminal judgement documents in simplified or formal version. Formal criminal judgement documents are applicable to the adversary litigation mode, where sufficient reasons need to be given. Therefore, formal criminal judgements should be rendered in a formal style and contain all the relevant factors of criminal judgements. On the other hand, a simplified form of criminal judgement documents is applicable to trials where prosecution and defendant reach agreement. In the simplified form of criminal judgement documents, the reasons for the judgements do not need to be given in exhaustive detail, and should rather be recorded with the pertinent facts duly noted, in particular the agreements of plea bargaining and the facts of leniency based on peccavi, which should be deemed the reasons for, or basis of, the given judgements.