Research On The Participation Of Duty Lawyers In Leniency For Admitting Guilt And Accepting Punishment

When choosing to voluntarily plead guilty,the accused face the option of a simplified procedure.However,there is a risk of violating the human rights of the accused during this simplified process,and therefore,it is necessary to strengthen the legal protection of the accused from an institutional level.Duty lawyers participating in cases involving guilty pleas comply with the legitimacy pursuit of this system,ensuring that those who plead guilty do so genuinely and voluntarily,while protecting their legal rights under this simplified process.However,based on current regulations and judicial practice,the participation of duty lawyers in such cases is often limited in terms of internal rights and external incentives,which affects the accused’s access to effective legal assistance.To address the underlying issues affecting the effectiveness of duty lawyers,this article first reviews the basic theory of duty lawyer participation in plea bargaining.It then summarizes some prominent issues that have arisen in the current legal norms and pilot programs.On this basis,the reasons for these issues are analyzed in depth.Finally,in order to better achieve the goals of this system,specific optimization paths for duty lawyer participation in plea bargaining cases are suggested.In the first part,the concept and nature of the leniency system for guilty pleas are introduced.The role of duty lawyers in the leniency system is explained from two aspects: substantive and procedural responsibilities.The specific content of "effective legal assistance" is explored based on the "Working Method".Lastly,the functional value of duty lawyers participating in cases involving guilty pleas is emphasized.The second part clarifies the legislative history of the duty lawyer system and defines its responsibilities and working methods.Taking into account the pilot experience,it examines the participation of duty lawyers in practice.Finally,it summarizes the outstanding issues related to legislation and pilot programs: the role divergence of duty lawyers,lack of litigation power,"heavy responsibility and little benefit",and poor coordination of duty work.In the third part,the causal factors of the issues related to duty lawyer participation are deeply explored.The reasons mainly stem from the fact that duty lawyers serve as both rights protectors and power collaborators in cases involving guilty pleas.At the textual and theoretical levels,their functional orientation lacks consensus,the attribution of legal aid responsibility is unclear,and there is a lack of awareness of connecting their working mechanisms.In the fourth part,optimization paths for duty lawyer participation in cases involving guilty pleas are suggested.Starting from clear theoretical and practical identities of duty lawyers as defense counsel,measures such as refining the right to visit,expanding the right to review documents,clearly defining the right to negotiate sentence,and granting the right to request evidence disclosure are recommended to enhance their due diligence.On the basis of clarifying the government’s legal aid responsibility,it is suggested to increase government financial investment,establish a system for exemption from duty lawyer responsibilities,and explore government purchase services to prevent the inappropriate transfer of national responsibilities to lawyers.Lastly,measures are proposed to improve the working mechanism between lawyers and explore appropriate transformations of their identities.