What are the characteristics of criminal summary procedure?

1. What are the characteristics of criminal summary procedure? Compared with ordinary procedure, criminal summary procedure is greatly simplified, but it has its own characteristics: 1. Criminal summary procedure is only applicable to the procedure of first instance. Second instance procedure, death penalty review procedure and trial supervision procedure are not applicable. Books related to criminal summary procedure (2) Criminal summary procedure can only be applied by grassroots people's courts. Although the people's courts at or above the intermediate level also have cases of first instance, they cannot be applied. Because according to the provisions of the hierarchical jurisdiction of China's Criminal Procedure Law, criminal cases endangering national security are tried by intermediate people's courts, and major criminal cases are accepted by higher people's courts in provinces (autonomous regions and municipalities directly under the Central Government) or nationwide and the Supreme People's Court. (3) Cases that are tried by criminal summary procedure must be criminal cases with clear facts, simple circumstances and minor crimes. Criminal summary procedure is not applicable to major difficult, complex and foreign-related criminal cases. (4) Criminal summary procedure is a simplification of ordinary procedure to achieve the purpose of quick trial. Such as the simplification of trial organization, the simplification of court trial procedure and the simplification of trial cycle. As for the degree of simplification, it is clearly stipulated by law, and it is not decided by the court, the procuratorate or the parties. (5) The organization of the trial is simple. Implement a one-person responsibility system. Summary trial of public prosecution cases is one of the important contents of court trial reform. This greatly improves the litigation efficiency of grass-roots judicial organs, saves judicial costs, helps to focus on major, complex and difficult cases, and promotes the improvement of case quality. However, due to the imperfection of summary procedure legislation, it is not convenient to apply summary procedure to public prosecution cases in practice. Second, the existing problems: 1, the scope of application of summary procedure is too narrow. Practice shows that expanding the application scope of summary procedure is an inevitable requirement to improve litigation efficiency, and it should be further expanded. For example, we can also try to apply summary procedures to crimes committed by the blind, deaf-mute, and minors, so as to quickly close the case, reduce their psychological harm, and promote their repentance and rehabilitation. 2. The overall application rate of summary procedure is not high. Summary procedure can be applied to a considerable number of cases, but it cannot be applied. As shown in the previous chart, in the past five years, the hospital has sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of less than three years, criminal detention, public surveillance and fines 1064 cases, of which summary procedure cases1kloc-0/5 cases were applicable and 78 cases/kloc-0 cases were actually applicable, accounting for 77% of the applicable cases, accounting for 27%. 3. If the court recommends the application of summary procedure, the procuratorate shall send personnel to appear in court to support the public prosecution. Summary procedure does not give the defendant the right to choose, and the purpose of summary procedure is the coordination of procedural justice and procedural economy. The pursuit of procedural economy should be based on procedural justice. Of course, defendants who apply summary procedure often have certain restrictions on their litigation rights, which is actually a concession of justice to interests. But this concession should be decided by the defendant in this case. Because the application of summary procedure means that the defendant trusts the judge and gives up part of the right to investigate the evidence of the case. Only by giving the defendant the initiative to apply summary procedure can we ensure that his status as the subject of litigation is maintained, thus embodying procedural justice. The current summary procedure in China gives the people's court the initiative to apply summary procedure, and requires that the application of this procedure be based on the suggestion or consent of the people's court, regardless of whether the defendant agrees or actively chooses to apply summary procedure. Moreover, if the people's court finds it inappropriate to apply summary procedure during the trial, it may also decide to abandon the application of summary procedure and reopen the trial in accordance with ordinary procedures. However, even if the defendant thinks that the application of summary procedure will lead to unfair treatment or unfair judgment, he has no chance to apply ordinary procedure, which leads to a series of litigation rights of the defendant being restricted or even deprived. 4. Lack of supervision over summary procedure. First of all, in the stage of examination and prosecution, investigators often fail to inform the victims and defendants of their rights and obligations in the litigation stage, which makes them unable to fully enjoy their legal rights and fulfill their legal obligations in time. Secondly, when the public prosecution agency applies the summary procedure to transfer the case to the court for prosecution, it usually does not give opinions and suggestions on the harmful results caused by the case for the judge's reference, and the defendant has no statutory or discretionary circumstances that are heavier or lighter, which is not conducive to safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of the parties and is not conducive to the fair enforcement of the law by the judicial organs. 5. Summary procedure has not strengthened the role of defense lawyers. Compared with ordinary procedure, summary procedure is applied, and the defendant's litigation rights need the participation, guidance and help of defense lawyers more. Otherwise, the defendant will be in a very disadvantageous position. Countries in the world that stipulate criminal trial procedures have strengthened the role of defense lawyers. In the case of physical lovers, the court will also force the defendant to appoint a defense lawyer. The current situation in China shows that people's legal awareness and rights concept are still very weak, so it is particularly important to appoint defense lawyers for defendants. The application and operation of criminal summary procedure greatly increases the dependence on defense lawyers. Without the guidance and help of defense lawyers, the defendant will be in a very unfavorable position in the summary trial procedure. However, China's appointed defense only applies to a very narrow scope. Once the defendant in a summary procedure case is poor or unable to hire a lawyer, it is difficult for him to defend his legitimate rights and interests through self-defense. The above table shows that only 40 cases were defended by lawyers, accounting for 5% of the total. 6. According to the summary procedure of China's criminal procedure law, the people's procuratorate can't send personnel to appear in court, which undoubtedly makes the prosecution power and judicial power combined into one judge. Once there is no restriction mechanism of power, it will inevitably lead to the proliferation of power, and the trial of the court will easily deviate from procedural justice without the supervision of the procuratorate. The principle of judge's neutrality in trial is an important content of procedural justice. The stipulation that the people's procuratorate can't send personnel to appear in court in summary procedure undoubtedly makes the judge presiding over summary procedure undertake two kinds of litigation functions at the same time, which seriously violates the principle of separation of prosecution and trial and the neutrality of judges, and does not meet the most basic requirements of procedural justice. 7. The provisions of summary procedure lack operability. The provisions of the criminal procedure law on summary procedure are too simple, and some links need specific systems to regulate. Some scholars put forward to redesign and reform the summary procedure in the spirit of "participation mode". To sum up, there are still many defects in China's summary procedure reform, the existing legal basis is insufficient, and the establishment of its system is unreasonable, which needs further study and improvement. Summary procedure is included in China's trial system. Compared with the general procedure, the proposed procedure deals with simple cases. The general summary procedure can also be an exclusive system, that is, the judge conducts the trial alone without the participation of jurors. Summary procedure is a very important litigation procedure in China.