1. Under what circumstances can a litigation defender refuse to defend? If the matters entrusted by the defense are illegal, the client uses the services provided by the lawyer to engage in illegal activities, or the client conceals the facts, the lawyer has the right to refuse to defend. According to the relevant provisions of the Lawyers Law, after accepting the entrustment, a defense lawyer shall not refuse defense without justifiable reasons. Therefore, there are strict legal conditions for a lawyer to refuse to defend. Only when the above conditions are met, the refusal to defend can be established. This is different from the right of criminal suspects and defendants to refuse defense. Legal basis: "Article 32 of the Lawyers Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the client may refuse the lawyer who has already been appointed to continue to defend or represent him, and at the same time, he may appoint other lawyers as defenders or agents. After the lawyer accepts the entrustment, there is no The lawyer shall not refuse to defend or represent the defendant without legitimate reasons. However, if the entrusted matter is illegal, the client uses the services provided by the lawyer to engage in illegal activities, or the client deliberately conceals important facts related to the case, the lawyer has the right to refuse to defend or represent the defendant. Can a criminal suspect or defendant refuse to be defended by a defender? The subject of the right to defense is the criminal suspect or defendant. Fundamentally speaking, the right to defense is the litigation rights of the criminal suspect or defendant, and the right to defend the defendant. It is derived from the subject of defense. Therefore, the Criminal Procedure Law has no reason to restrict the right of a criminal suspect or defendant to refuse defense. Legal basis: Article 45 of the Criminal Procedure Law. , the defendant can refuse the defender to continue to defend him, or he can entrust other defenders to defend him. Article 45 of the Interpretation of the Supreme People's Court on the Application of the Criminal Procedure Law of the People's Republic of China stipulates that the defendant refuses the assignment of a legal aid agency. If the defendant refuses to be defended by a lawyer assigned by the legal aid agency and insists on exercising his right of defense, the people's court shall find out the reasons and grant permission, but the defendant must appoint another lawyer. Defender; If the defendant does not appoint a separate defender, the people's court shall notify the legal aid agency in writing within three days to appoint another lawyer to provide defense for him. Legal purpose:
1. The defendant refuses to plead guilty and refuses to defend. According to my country's Criminal Procedure Law and relevant regulations, the defendant's refusal to plead guilty is a statutory reason for refusing to plead guilty. 2. Will refusing to plead guilty lead to aggravated punishment? In judicial practice, prosecutors and judges consider the defendant's refusal to plead guilty to the crime of "refusing to plead guilty." "please plead guilty", its views and practices of aggravating punishment are not in line with the principle of separation of litigation functions, and violate the principles of separation of prosecution and trial, protection of defense rights, and judge's neutrality. The application of the criminal policy of "leniency and severity" in the trial field has its rationality in a specific historical stage. However, with the consolidation of political power and the construction of the legal system gradually getting on the right track, it emerged from extraordinary times and embodies strong Criminal policies that are politically necessary have lost their legitimacy. In order to implement the Constitution's provisions on "ruling the country according to law and building a socialist country ruled by law", judicial personnel should treat the defendant's "innocent" litigation behavior carefully from the perspective of procedural value and human rights protection. Then the defendant's defense behavior is regarded as "refuse to plead guilty" or "refuse to plead guilty", and then "refuse to plead guilty"; severe punishment; differentiation of litigation functions; political thinking of our country's Constitution. and the "Criminal Procedure Law" established that public security organs, procuratorial organs and courts should follow the principle of "division of labor and responsibilities, mutual cooperation and mutual restraint" in handling criminal cases to ensure the accurate and effective implementation of the law. According to this principle, the roles and functions of the procuratorial organs and the courts in criminal proceedings are different. The procuratorial organs are responsible for "procuratorial work, approving arrests, and directly accepting the investigation and prosecution of cases", while the courts are responsible for trials, that is, the separation of prosecution and trial. However, in practice, influenced by the concept of placing emphasis on prosecution and underestimating sentencing, the phenomenon of "excessive cooperation and insufficient restraint" between the procuratorial organs and the courts still occurs, and even "mutual cooperation" is used instead of "mutual restraint". The two courts are exactly the same. ", *** are committed to pursuing "simplified operations" for defendants to plead guilty and obey the law.
For example, in practice, many prosecutors and judges hold this view on sentencing: if the defendant makes a defense to the defender on the facts and evidence charged by the prosecutor, many prosecutors will think that the defendant "refuses to plead guilty" and often recommend The court applies a heavier penalty; conversely, if the defendant confesses to the alleged conduct and is less confrontational with the prosecutor, the prosecutor considers the defendant to have "pleaded guilty." "Good attitude", it is recommended that the court should be given a lighter punishment at its discretion. The judge usually follows the prosecutor's recommendation. The Criminal Law Amendment (8) recognizes the view that a defendant who pleads guilty can be given a lighter punishment, but the law has not yet clarified whether a defendant who does not plead guilty can be given a heavier punishment. Under the procedural law principle of separation of prosecution and trial and mutual restraint, the litigation functions and roles of judges and prosecutors are different, so their understanding of the defendant's litigation behavior may also be different. However, regarding the defense actions of defendants and prosecutors, judges and prosecutors hold the same view, that is, "refuse to plead guilty" and should be "severely punished." Is this view consistent with their respective litigation roles? Does it comply with the procedural law principles of separation and mutual restraint of prosecution and trial? From another perspective, this involves the protection of the rights of the defendant, so it is worthy of further study. In fact, in real life, we have certain misunderstandings about some legal issues. For example, heavy sentencing, etc. In fact, in real life, people will not regard a light sentence as a heavy sentence. This is very incorrect. The defendant refuses to plead guilty and the defender refuses to plead? This is not allowed and cannot be a reason for refusal. Please consult a professional lawyer specifically.