On Unbalance Of Sentencing And Its Countermeasures

The imbalance of sentencing is mainly manifested as the imbalance of sentencing between similar cases and the imbalance of sentencing between non-similar cases.To overcome the imbalance of sentencing,it is necessary to focus on the standardization of sentencing substantive rules and sentencing procedures,strengthen the guidance of judges’ discretion and value evaluation,and promote the stability and predictability of sentencing results.The "Guiding Opinions on Sentencing for Common Crimes" issued by the Supreme Law and the implementation rules of each province clarified the three-step sentencing law,sentencing principles,and the proportion of stricter or lenient adjustment of common sentencing circumstances for common crimes.The "Opinions on Several Issues Concerning Standardizing Sentencing Procedures" stipulates relatively independent sentencing procedures,strengthens the functions of public security organs to collect sentencing evidence,procuratorial organs to make sentencing recommendations,people’s courts to review sentencing facts,determine sentencing circumstances,and conduct sentencing reasoning.The right of the victim to put forward sentencing opinions is clearly stipulated.The standardization of sentencing activities and their procedures has been improved.However,there is still a lack of conceptual guidance on how to regulate the application of sentencing methods and circumstances.In terms of substance,the irregularity of sentencing is mainly manifested in that the judge’s sentencing method is not combined with responsibilityism,and the concrete manifestation is that the judge has a different understanding of the sentencing basis applied to the circumstances,and lacks basic judgment criteria for the force of the sentencing circumstances.Therefore,it is necessary to realize the balance of sentencing based on responsibility doctrine,classify the sentencing circumstances on the basis of responsibility and prevention,and comprehensively evaluate the sentencing effect of multiple sentencing circumstances.In terms of sentencing procedures,relatively independent sentencing procedures have a limited role in ensuring the impartiality of sentencing,the victims have not fully participated in the sentencing procedures,and the problems of insufficient sentencing information collection are more prominent.Therefore,an intermediate judgment can link the conviction procedure and the sentencing procedure to optimize the relatively independent sentencing procedure.Promote and assist victims to put forward sentencing opinions,expand sentencing procedures to handle sentencing information with the social investigation system,conduct social investigations with different contents on different types of defendants and criminal suspects,eliminate improper interference from extralegal factors,and balance efficiency and fairness.