| Summary procedures, as the efficient means to promote the split-flow of the complicated and the simple as well as to increase the litigation efficiency in criminal cases, has gained great improvement after evolving through various stages of changes and development in several countries around the world. Since the establishment in Criminal Procedural Law in 1996, the summary procedures in our country has gone through considerable modification and enrichment with 20 years of development. Due to the limits of legislation itself and judicial reality, the definition of summary procedures in 1996 was relatively rough and general, making it low application rate in practice. In terms of the issue, previous scholars and professors have conducted extensive research and have achieved quite substantial research results and have proposed some issues upon the system design and human rights of our summary procedures, which have been reflected and absorbed in the modification of Criminal Procedural Law of 2012. Still, compared with the foreign complete system, it has some disparities and insufficiencies and also is the process of improvement. Considering it, many scholars have never stopped the study of summary procedures but mostly conducted the overall comparative study of summary procedure as a whole system. Therefore, the thesis intends to take another path to focus on the distinctive and specific aspect of the initiation mechanism of summary procedures, with the hope of achieving the "point-area" effect.The thesis can be mainly divided into three parts with five chapters, and the author will mainly, from the view of comparative method and based on the initiation mechanism of summary procedures, make a comparison and conclusion of different legislation regulations and practices at home and abroad so as to propose a feasible direction for improvement.Part One:this part is composed of the first chapter and it mainly states the basic concepts, characteristics and values of summary procedures and introduces the contents of related initiation mechanism from different angles of classification, with the emphasis on right, subject, standards and methods of initiation.Part Two:this part, which is the main part of thesis, made up of the second、third and the fourth chapters, mainly make a comparative analysis between our initiation systems with foreign ones. The second chapter mainly discusses the history of our summary procedures’establishment and development and focuses on analyzing the regulations regarding summary procedure and its initiation mechanism in Criminal Procedure law of 1996 and of 2012 to make a conclusion of its features. The third chapter focuses on judicial practice and concludes that we have had considerable progress of system improvement and right protection in the law of 2012 as well as some drawbacks to make up, such as the defendant’s lacking in the right of initiative to apply for summary procedure, singleness of initiation mechanism standards and dominance of authority principle on initiation models. The fourth chapter primarily introduces the legislation and practice of representative countries in Continent Law and Common Law. By comparing the two law systems internally and externally, the author has gained the knowledge of the difference of judicial philosophy between the two law systems as well as some similarities in regulations for our improvement, which provides a feasible direction for the reform and improvement of our initiation mechanism.Part Three:The fifth chapter constitutes the last part. On the basis of theory and research mentioned above, this part will mainly discuss the direction for further improvement, that is, to diversify the summary procedures by enriching the categories based on different situation in different cases. In addition, more attention should be attached to guarantee the defendant’s rights and subjectivity by achieving a better transition from "power-oriented" to "right-oriented". |
PDF Full Text Request