The Participation Of The Death Penalty Review Proceduces By The Prosecution

The death penalty review procedures in death penalty cases as a last line of our country to guard the quality of the substantive points of cases, no doubt in criminal proceedings is an extremely important position. However, over the years, because our country did not set more specific procedure rules on the death penalty review process, making the death penalty review proceedings almost become an administrative examination and approval of the activity in the court system, the fair procedure has also been a significant challenge. However, since the Supreme People's Court got back the right to approve the death penalty cases, to improve the death penalty review process has formally started, and to enhance the action of the death penalty review procedures becomes the direction of reform for the death penalty review procedures, the prosecution involved in the death penalty review procedures has been put on the agenda. But because the reform of the death penalty review proceedings has just started, there is no open to public and more comprehensive death penalty review procedures, so the targeted monitoring is nurturing for the prosecution to the death penalty review procedures. The special concept of targeted supervision at this stage is extremely important meaning for the prosecution involved in the death penalty review procedures. At present, there is no specific rules can be based on, the supervision of the prosecution to the death penalty review procedures must comply with the requirement of "not offside in place, effective and efficient". Targeted oversight is essential. Targeted monitoring can be said to be on a technical level, and focus on the overall situation of death penalty cases. There has a clear and consistent monitoring purpose, and the dispute settlement mechanism which can stand the test. At this stage, all of these aspects are just the security of effectively improving quality of the prosecution agencies involved in the death penalty review procedures. In the long run, after the reform of the death penalty review proceedings, the prosecution still has a considerable need for involvement of the death penalty review procedures, and target-oriented way of monitoring can continue to play a role.In addition to the full text of the introduction and conclusion, the body is divided into four parts, for a total of more than 30,000 words. In this paper, the text contains two clues. One clue is based on the logic level about how the prosecution involved in the death penalty review process. The other one is based on the timing level about the present and the future development of the procuratorial monitoring to the death penalty review process. To make each part in the text as a whole by these two clues. And to discuss the participation of the prosecution to the death penalty review process from many dimensions.The first part is to research the theory of the prosecution involved in the death penalty review process. As we all know, the Supreme People's Court in 2007 was formally withdraw the right to implement the death penalty immediately, what followed is the monopoly of power for the court to death cases, in addition to the Supreme People's Court has not formally announced a set of specific rules and regulations of the death penalty review procedures, the death penalty review process are a lack of transparency in public, and the power of the court is not monitored, which make the trepidation increasing day by day. Then the requirement of monitoring the court's authority to the death penalty is also growing, and this is the social background of the prosecution involved in the death penalty review process. The prosecution should be involved in the death penalty review process has become a consensus. Then after confirming that the prosecution should participate in the death penalty review process, what kind of identity should the prosecution be as a part? Although scholars still have some differences on this issue, the writer thinks the prosecution supervisors should stick to its identity-to monitor the death penalty review process targeted. This is a more reasonable choice.The second part is to explain the connotation and specific measures of targeted monitoring. The targeted monitoring is the development of succession from the technical monitoring. First of all, the oversight body should be set up to highlight the specific. And the Supreme People's Procuratorate should set up specialized agencies involved in the death penalty review proceedings. Secondly, the way of the prosecution involved in the death penalty review process is the necessary condition to ensure that their role be able to exert effective oversight, so at this level, the Supreme People's Court should fulfill its obligations to help. On the situation of institutions and measures be in place, the most important part is the content of the prosecution's targeted monitoring. At this part, because of the lack of regulations, the content of the Supreme People's Procuratorate targeted monitoring is expected ahead and meanings of legislation at a certain level. At this stage, it mainly based on "the Supreme People's Court reviewed death penalty cases on the provisions of a number of issues", and through the experience to sum up the typical situation of the death penalty review summed up the typical situation of the case review of death penalty cases on the supervision of entities, as well as oversight from the Attorney the point of view of the very limited part of the monitoring procedures. This is also the core aspect of the duty for the Supreme People's Procuratorate participating to the death penalty review process.The third part is about building the dispute settlement mechanism after the prosecution involved in the death penalty review process. The whole mechanism is composed by the dispute settlement system and the rule system. Construction of this mechanism is to ensure that the quality of the death penalty review process can be improved effectively after the prosecution involved in it, clarifying the powers and responsibilities, powers and responsibilities consistent and effective supervision, inspection and there is fruit. At this level, the mechanism is the protection aspect to implement the Supreme People's Procuratorate involved in the death penalty review proceedings. After understanding the reason for construct the mechanism, and knowing its significance, it can produce its desired effects when sets up the specific steps. In the case for the introduction of supervision of the National People's Congress on this point, I think that should be timely to look at the dialectical question, the National People's Congress oversight of cases because its own is not perfect, it will certainly make a number of questions in monitoring courses. But when narrowing the scope to the death penalty review cases, we can not generalize it. First of all, if monitor the death penalty review cases by the National People's Congress supervision, with appropriate grid can only be the identity of the NPC Standing Committee (in view of the National People's Congress is not a permanent body), or by the special internal structures set by the authority (usually there is legal experts). Up from the level of personnel can give up at places such as the National People's Congress at all levels that may occur in the lower quality concerns. Secondly, from the power structures of our country-"one government, two courts", the NPC Standing Committee or its authorized special internal structures is the main body to oversee the Supreme People's Court and the Supreme People's Procuratorate from the top. Third, supervision of the National People's Congress are still passive monitoring, and individual supervision as a right to give to the prosecution will effectively avoid the worry about the interference of the independence of the judiciary. In addition, as long as the cases in the implementation of the process of supervision conferred by the Constitution with full respect for the people's courts and legal supervision of the trial and the right to review death penalty cases in the dispute settlement mechanism which case supervision is the introduction of the National People's Congress has its importance, but also exist must necessarily, and return our country to promote the building of the judicial system must play an active role.The fourth part is to discuss the problem about how the prosecution involved in after the reform of the future death penalty review process. After all, the perfect of a model should not just look at the gains and losses, but also have a long-term view of development trends. Prosecutors involved in the death penalty review process is that the trend of the times. With the trend of the litigation reform of the death penalty review proceedings, how prosecutors play an effective better role in the death penalty review process in the future, of course, is also covered in this article means. So at the beginning, the writer starts from the litigation reform of the death penalty review process, and make a clear direction that it only can be improved on the basis of the death penalty review process existed. Then on the basis of the death penalty review process under such model, the writer analyzes how the prosecution performs its duty well on the new situation in the future. From the control, debate, pre-trial supervision, the writer develops and improves the connotation of the prosecution involved in the death penalty review process. After the litigation reform of the death penalty review process, the prosecution should be involved in it more deeply. At the same time, the supervision of the prosecution also has a new meaning. Among all the supervisions of the death penalty review process, the prosecutors monitoring for the defender is prominent. Counsel as a party to participate in criminal proceedings, the legality of the activity of the court proceedings should also be monitored by the prosecution. When the Supreme People's Procuratorates think that the defenders do not have a legitimate case during the legal action, it should give its monitoring comments reasonably.