The 2018 revision of the Criminal Procedure Law officially incorporated the lenient punishment system into the law.Under the system,the prosecution and defense negotiate during the prosecution review phase,and then the prosecutor make a recommendation.Sentencing recommendations made by the prosecutor are adopted by the judge in the subsequent trial phase.Therefore,the Criminal Procedure Law and relevant judicial interpretations make clear the effect of sentencing recommendations.In the early stage of the trial of leniency system of guilty plea and its operation after entering the law,the sentencing suggestions put forward by prosecutors mainly put forward the range of sentencing suggestions.In practice,judges generally adopt such sentencing recommendations.In 2019 alone,the Supreme People’s Procuratorate launched a top-down reform to refine sentencing recommendations.The most important feature of this reform is that,in the case of guilty plea,the precise sentencing suggestion has formed a certain rigid binding force on the judge.However,it also leads to the contradiction between the right of sentencing suggestion and the right of trial.From the practical level,the precision of sentencing suggestions is conducive to more fully condense the opinions of the prosecution and the defense on sentencing in the negotiation process,and has great significance for further implementing the leniency system of guilty plea.However,since the system of leniency in guilty plea has not been implemented long,the operation basis of accurate sentencing suggestions under the system of leniency in guilty plea has great problems.The first part of this paper summarizes and concludes the basic theory of accurate sentencing suggestions in guilty plea cases,highlighting the difference between accurate sentencing suggestions and traditional sentencing suggestions.The second part discusses the difficulties and causes of the accurate sentencing advice in the case of guilty plea.The four main problems include: the existence of repressive consultation in the prosecution and defense consultation,the insufficiency of the existing sentencing guidance documents,the increase of the working pressure of the case handling organs,and the ambiguity of the definition of the precise sentencing suggestion which is "obviously inappropriate".The third part analyzes the main causes of the problem,including three: the dominant position of the mode of authority litigation,the lack of consultative judicial concept in the criminal justice,and the superposition of the reform of the integration of arrest and prosecution led to the increase of the pressure of the investigators.In the fourth part,based on the pattern of overseas practice,it shows the operating mechanism of the sentencing suggestion in the plea bargaining of the two countries in the Anglo-American law system,and the operating mechanism of the sentencing suggestion in the plea negotiation procedure of Germany and France in the civil law system,and excavates the place worth learning and reference from.Finally,based on the actual situation of our judicial practice and combined with overseas practical experience,five suggestions are put forward here: first,the case handling organs should make the scope of case application of accurate sentencing suggestions clear;Second,in the pre-trial stage,substantively implement the equality of prosecution and defense negotiations;Third,the three parties jointly issued new sentencing guidance documents;Fourth,clearly define the determination of "obviously improper" in the sentencing recommendations;Fifth,case handling organs improve the quality of sentencing recommendations... |