本文選題：馬樂案 + 法律錯誤��； 參考：《河南社會科學》2016年10期

【摘要】：馬樂案基于法律錯誤而再審改判,除刑事實體法上關涉援引法定刑之解釋,亦有程序探討之價值�；趹椃ㄉ系姆杀O(jiān)督職責,檢察機關對確有錯誤的已生效裁判提起再審抗訴有其積極意義。然而,實事求是、有錯必糾的價值取向卻與法的安定性、裁判的既判力理論沖突,也與禁止雙重危險、有利被告等原則相悖,不符合司法規(guī)律和訴訟原理的要求。應在追求實體公正與維護法的安定性、裁判的既判力之間尋求平衡,秉持現代司法理念,確立禁止雙重危險原則。應將審判監(jiān)督程序分為對事實錯誤的再審程序和對法律錯誤的特別抗訴程序,并區(qū)分有利于被告人的再審和不利于被告人的再審。對事實錯誤,通常只能提出有利于被告人的再審,目的在于實現個案公正;對法律錯誤,應由最高人民檢察院向最高人民法院提出特別抗訴加以糾正,目的在于保證法律統(tǒng)一正確實施。
[Abstract]:Ma Le case was retried and revised on the basis of error of law, which not only related to the interpretation of invoking legal penalty in criminal substantive law, but also had the value of procedural exploration. On the basis of the legal supervision duty of the constitution, it is of positive significance for the procuratorial organ to file a retrial and protest against the invalid judge. However, the value orientation of seeking truth from facts and correcting mistakes is in conflict with the stability of law, the theory of res judicata, the prohibition of double danger and the principle of favouring the defendant, which does not accord with the requirements of judicial law and principle of litigation. It is necessary to seek a balance between the pursuit of substantive justice and the stability of the law, the res judicata of the referee, uphold the modern judicial concept, and establish the principle of prohibiting double danger. The procedure of trial supervision should be divided into the retrial procedure for the error of fact and the special protest procedure for the mistake of law, and a distinction should be made between the retrial in favor of the defendant and the retrial against the defendant. For factual errors, usually only a retrial in favour of the defendant can be made, with the purpose of realizing the fairness of the case, and the Supreme people's Procuratorate shall make a special protest to the Supreme people's Court to correct the errors of law. The purpose is to ensure the correct implementation of the law.
【作者單位】： 中國政法大學訴訟法學研究院;
【基金】：基金項目:國家2011計劃司法文明協同創(chuàng)新中心成果
【分類號】：D925.2;D920.5

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前3條

1 陳偉;;一起惡意訴訟案背后的玄機——廣西歷史上首次由案外人提起再審的案件塵埃落定[J];中國商人;2010年04期

2 鄧聯墩,劉萍;本案應以何種方式免除經濟幫助[J];律師世界;1998年05期

3 ;[J];;年期

相關重要報紙文章 前4條

1 本報記者 李艷潔;顧雛軍將提起再審申訴 準備再創(chuàng)業(yè)[N];中國經營報;2013年

2 記者 陳東升;浙江高院對陳建陽等人死刑案提起再審[N];法制日報;2013年

3 本報記者 張亦嶸;提起再審主體多理由過于寬泛[N];法制日報;2005年

4 本報記者 張國強;鐵西區(qū)政府毀約拒絕履行協議[N];法制日報;2011年

，

本文編號：1779933