A Study On Confession Leniency System In The Investigation Stage Of Job-related Crimes In China

The implementation of the Supervision Law in 2019 formally established the leniency system for confessing guilt and accepting punishment during the investigation stage of duty-related crimes.On the one hand,in view of the many characteristics of job-related crimes,the phenomenon of "few cases" in supervision organs,especially grassroots supervision organs,is prominent,and it is urgent to build a system that can effectively relieve the work pressure of supervision organs.On the other hand,in the context of the normalization and continuous development of the current anti-corruption work,The establishment of a leniency system for confession and punishment during the investigation stage of duty-related crimes can effectively adapt to China’s national conditions and the needs of the Chinese-style anti-corruption model.Carry out the basic policy of party discipline of "curing the disease and saving the patient" and the criminal policy of "combining leniency with strictness" in the national law.However,in practice,compared with the overall system application rate and appeal rate of criminal cases,The application rate of the leniency system for confession and punishment in duty-related crime cases is low,and the appeal rate is high.The reason for this lies in the principles and abstractions stipulated in Article 31 of the Supervision Law,This shows that the supervisory agency has shown an overly conservative and cautious attitude towards the application of the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment at the stage of investigation.In the investigation of duty-related crimes at the present stage,there is actually no "should" relationship between the person under investigation who pleads guilty and accepts punishment and the supervisory authority’s right to a lenient punishment,but only a "may" relationship,that is,the case-handling Supervision Organ has the right to decide whether to propose lenient punishment by reference to the provisions of Article 31 of the Supervision Law,and the person under investigation actually does not have the status of the subject of choosing to obtain lenient punishment.Combined with the strict application that has occurred when the Supervision Organs apply the lenient system for admitting guilt and accepting punishment in current practice,the supervisory organ lacks detailed normative guidance,and it is difficult to guarantee the authenticity of the person under investigation’s confession of guilt and punishment,etc.,which together lead to the situation that the leniency system for confession of guilt and punishment cannot be implemented,and the punishment does not go smoothly during the investigation stage.Based on this,in order to improve the efficiency of litigation and ease the pressure on the work of supervision organs,we have earnestly implemented the criminal policy of "leniency and strictness".With reference to the Criminal Procedure Law,unify the relevant identification standards for the leniency system for pleading guilty and punishing under the Supervision Law;Standardize the form and use of documents related to the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment during the investigation stage;In addition,explore the establishment of a lawyer intervention system during the investigation stage of job-related crimes,and protect the relevant rights of the persons under investigation during the investigation stage,ensure that the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment effectively takes advantage of the system,and give full play to the role of the leniency system for pleading guilty and accepting punishment in combating duty-related crimes.