Study On The Trial Participation Right Of Juries In The Large Collegiate Bench Of Criminal Cases

In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this paper is divided into four parts.The first part is a theoretical overview of the reform of the powers of participation of the criminal collegial panel.This part is divided into four parts to discuss: Firstly,it discusses the function of the "three professional judges and four jurors" collegial panel model stipulated in the reform of jurors' power to participate in the trial,and what advantages it has compared with the "three small collegial panel".I believe that it takes possession of political,social and judicial functions.First,from the perspective of political function,the increase in the number of members of the collegial panel requires the selection of a wider range of ordinary people to participate in the trial,and it is not easy to form a fixed jury,which is conducive to safeguarding judicial democracy.Secondly,from the perspective of social function,the cases heard by the collegial panel are serious criminal cases with great controversy.In these cases,the value of common sense justice and life rationality of ordinary people can be better reflected by absorbing jurors to participate in the trial.Thirdly,from the perspective of judicial function,the collective decision-making structure of the participation system of the collegial panel is more conducive to strengthening the understanding and memory of evidence,overcoming prejudices and realizing substantive justice.At the same time,the collegial panel is more likely to restrict judicial corruption and achieve the neutrality of judges,which is conducive to the implementation of the principle of modern court hearing,thus promoting procedural justice.Secondly,I take considerations of the scope of participation of the grand collegial panel in this part,which is stipulated in the legislation as a case that "may be sentenced to more than 10 years of fixed-term imprisonment,life imprisonment,death penalty,which has great social impact".Thirdly,in this part,I discuss the allocation of powers and powers of the Grand collegial panel system.Jurors and judges share the power of fact determination.Judges alone enjoy the power of law application.Fourthly,I discuss the functions and powers of the Grand collegial panel system in this part,and discusses it from five aspects: the pre-trial marking mechanism,the question list system,the guidance and prompt of judges,the comments and votes of the Grand collegial panel,and the legal responsibility of jurors.The second part is the practical investigation of the reform of the powers of participation of the criminal collegial panel in China.It is divided into three parts to discuss the functions and powers of the participants,the allocation of the functions and powers,and the operation of the functions and powers.In terms of the scope of participation,the criteria for the application of the Grand collegial panel by the pilot courts are not clear,and the scope of application is very narrow.In terms of power allocation,the trial courts have different understandings of jurors' right to ascertain facts because of the indistinguishability between factual and legal issues.In terms of functions and powers,I divide them into five aspects for discussion.First of all,the trial court has a positive attitude towards the jurors' pre-trial examination papers;secondly,the application of the question list is less,and how,by whom and according to what criteria are not uniform.Thirdly,the judges' instructions and prompts are not standardized;fourthly,in the deliberations and votes of the collegial panel,the voting rules are rough,and the main body of resolving major differences is the trial committee;fifthly,in the allocation of responsibilities of the collegial panel,there is no clear agreement of powers and responsibilities.The third part is the question and reflection of the reform of the power of participation of the criminal collegial panel in our country.Regardless of the system design in legislation or the performance in practice,the function of the participation system of the collegial panel can not be realized.In other words,the effect of this reform is far more significant in form than in essence,and more is just the embellishment of political democracy.This result comes from the problems of legislative design itself and the obstacles of external supporting mechanism.In terms of legislative design,there are three problems: first,the scope of participation is ambiguous and does not conform to economic principles;second,the powers of jurors are entirely controlled by judges;third,the judicial responsibilities of the large collegial panel are not clearly allocated.From the external supporting mechanism,there are three obstacles: one is the substantive trial;the other is the imperfect procedural diversion mechanism;and the third is the failure to achieve the judicial system of "trial-centered".The fourth part is the suggestions for the further reform of the powers of the criminal collegial panel.Firstly,I re-divide the scope of participation,and defines the scope of participation of the seven-member collegial panel as a case that the defendant does not plead guilty or has disputes over conviction and sentencing,and may be sentenced to more than 10 years of fixed-term imprisonment,life imprisonment and death penalty.Secondly,I redefines the powers of participation of jurors in the criminal collegial panel and defines them as The power of "identifying the constitutive elements of a crime" is to share the power of conviction with judges,while judges enjoy the power of sentencing exclusively.Thirdly,in order to implement the jurors' power to participate in the trial,I put forward some suggestions to improve the operation mechanism of the jurors' power.Firstly,we should give them limited right to read papers before the court;secondly,we should establish the question list system;thirdly,we should standardize the guidance and prompts of the judges;fourthly,we should reconstruct the rules of the deliberative voting of the collegial panel;fifthly,we should realize the consistency of powers and responsibilities and clarify the scope of responsibility of the jurors and judges.Fourthly,I also propose the corresponding suggestions to improve the external supporting mechanism.One is to further promote the substantive nature of court trials;the other is to optimize the complicated and simple diversion mechanism.