The Empirical Research On The Implementation Situation Of Sentencing Recommendation

Sentencing recommendation is the litigation activity that the prosecutorial organs filed tothe People’s Court for the proposed punishment to the defendant, it contains therecommendation of penalty types, period of punishment and the execution modalities. It is theway the prosecutorial organs exercise the right to seek criminal sentencing request to thePeople’s Court. It can start the sentencing procedure, restrict the sentencing decision, clarifythe burden of proof and preset the supervision scale. The implementation of the sentencingrecommendation is meant to restrict the judge’s discretion in sentencing. The author find theproblems and factors which lead to these problems in the operation of sentencing proposalthough the investigation of W district C city S province, then put forward some specificmeasures to improve the sentencing recommendation system.Apart form the introduction of the article, the body is divided into four parts, about25,000words.The first part describes the operation status of sentencing recommendation in the samplearea. First, the author refined the rules which the prosecutorial organs should obey insentencing recommendation from the system level. It contains the scope of the applicationof the sentencing proposal, the way the sentencing proposal put forward, productionspecifications of sentencing recommendation submissions, the collection of evidence used insentencing recommendation and the reasoning of sentencing recommendation. In succession,the author gave us a insight into the practice of sentencing recommendation through theoperation of the sentencing recommendation. Such as the application of the cases, evidencecollection, the examination and approval procedures, the manufacture of sentencingrecommendation submissions, the way the prosecutorial organs propose the sentencingrecommendation and the post review of the judgment.The second part presents the problem in the operation of sentencing recommendation.Several problems have been exposed in the operation of sentencing recommendation, first isthe tediousness of the examination and approval procedures in the examination of sentencingrecommendation submissions, and the arbitrariness of sentencing recommendation putforward in court. The second is the irregularities in the producing of sentencing submissionsweakened the supervision function of sentencing recommendation mainly in the overlarge scale of the proposed period of punishment, and in the lack of necessary reasoning in therecommendation of probation sentencing. The third is the lack of reasoning in proposingsentencing recommendation. The recommendation the prosecutor proposed in court is legallybinding, but the prosecutor just proposed the content of sentencing recommendation withoutany reasoning. The forth is with the development of science and technology, sentencingdatabase platforms appeared and have had an impact on the sentencing recommendation. Theintelligent system allowed the judge to click the certain option and the sentencing conclusioncomes out. The influence of the sentencing recommendation waned.In the third part, the author analyses the factors which influence the running ofsentencing recommendation system. First is the lack of separated sentencing procedure.Separate sentencing procedure is a prerequisite of sentencing recommendation system, andmany problems arising in the practice were caused by the lack of it. The second is theunseasonable design of the system. such as, the scope of the sentencing proposal is regulatedin a authorized provision, it enabled the prosecutor to make it clear which case to propose andwhich not to. It was unreasonable that the complicated made and approved recommendationsubmissions just have a preliminary effect, while the recommendation the prosecutorproposed in court is proposed orally, and without a written carrier. The third is the absence ofinformation disclosure. It is not conducive for the prosecutor to collect all the evidence,andbrings difficulties to the sentencing defense, moreover, it could cause the evidence surprise tothe defense which could delay the efficiency of the trial. The last,the lack of sentencingreasoning lead to the absence of formal response to the sentencing recommendation, itenabled the prosecutorial organs to identify the existence of unfair sentencing.The last part is about to perfecting the system of sentencing recommendations. First, toestablish the independent sentencing procedure, isolate the conviction and the sentencinginvestigation and debate. Convict the crime before the sentencing hearing begins. Theindependent sentencing procedure is not available to all cases, only who has any objection tothe conviction or sentencing facts can be applied to the independent sentencing procedure,this can ease the impact of the independent procedure to the efficiency. Second, improve theexisting system’s shortcomings. Such as the redesigning of scope of application and the time,the establishing of sentencing information disclosure system. The third, complete thepractice in sentencing recommendations. Emphasizing the importance of the principalprosecutors system, let the principal prosecutor decide the approval of sentencing recommendation. Making standard of sentencing proposal. Unified the making of sentencingrecommendation submissions, obey the rules of penalty types, period of punishment and theexecution modalities. To ensure the reasoning of sentencing recommendation in court, takethe prosecutor’s reasoning into the performance appraisal, and set the adverse consequencesin the litigation if the prosecutors do not reasoning. The last, add some guarantee measures tomake sure that the sentencing recommendation system work perfectly. Improve the legal aidsystem, to provide legal aid to the criminal suspects who have objection to the conviction andsentencing facts. Establish the sentencing investigation system, the prosecutor should attachto the investigation report on sentencing while propose the sentencing recommendations onthe death penalty and non-custodial sentencing. Judge’s verdict reasoning. A judgment mustcontain the official response to sentencing recommendations and make the rational reasoning.To protect the victim’s right of procedure participation and the right to make comments onsentencing.