What are the problems in the designated defense of juvenile delinquency?

1. What are the problems in the designated defense of juvenile delinquency? The problems existing in the appointed defense of juvenile delinquency are: relatively lack of defense experience; The actual effective defense time is short; Inadequate trial preparation; The enthusiasm of trial is not high; The defense effect is not good; The legislation is unclear and lacks maneuverability; The low remuneration of legal aid leads to the low enthusiasm of appointed defense lawyers; Lack of necessary trust relationship with juvenile defendants; Lack of effective supervision over the quality and effectiveness of defense. Second, the deep-seated cause analysis (1) legislative provisions are unclear and lack of operability. As mentioned above, Article 267 of the new Criminal Procedure Law stipulates: "If a juvenile criminal suspect or defendant fails to entrust a defender, the people's court, the people's procuratorate and the public security organ shall notify the legal aid institution to defend his appointed lawyer." Although this provision clarifies the obligation of public security organs and procuratorates to appoint defense lawyers for qualified juvenile criminal suspects in the investigation stage and the prosecution stage, in practice, there is no clear provision on how public security organs and procuratorates appoint defense lawyers. For example, although the public security organs are obliged to appoint defenders for eligible minors, in practice, there are three appointed defense lawyers in three stages, and how the work of the three appointed defense lawyers is connected is not clear in legislation. For another example, although the newly revised Criminal Procedure Law clarifies the obligation of public security organs to appoint defense lawyers for eligible minors in the investigation stage, the legislation does not clarify the adverse consequences that public security organs should bear if they fail to fulfill this obligation. As we all know, it is of great significance to let appointed defense lawyers participate in the investigation stage. It is not only conducive to providing more professional legal help for the defendant, but also an important stage for collecting evidence of the defendant's innocence and light crime. However, the public security organs have not fulfilled their obligations at such an important stage, and whether they should bear the adverse consequences has been ignored by the legislation. This is an important deficiency. Therefore, these urgent problems need to be seriously considered and improved in the implementation of the criminal procedure law, otherwise even the best legal provisions can only be a dead letter. (2) The low remuneration of legal aid leads to the low enthusiasm of appointed defense lawyers. In practice, the remuneration for appointing defense lawyers to handle legal aid cases is low, which leads to many lawyers engaged in legal aid work having to pay for themselves. Some lawyers are unwilling to undertake appointed defense cases due to economic factors, which seriously affects the enthusiasm of appointed defense lawyers. Take the J District People's Court where the author is located as an example. When handling an appointed defense case, the appointed defense lawyer can only charge 400 yuan RMB. If the assigned defense lawyer goes to the detention center for questioning once, goes to the court to read the papers once, and appears in court once, 400 yuan is not even enough for basic gas, let alone how motivated the assigned defense lawyer is. In addition, the subsidies for handling designated defense cases in some areas are not only too small, but also cannot be guaranteed. During the investigation, we learned that although the state mainly allocates special funds from the financial allocations of governments at all levels for legal aid activities such as designated defense, due to the influence of local financial resources, insufficient funds can not be put in place in time from time to time. In addition, the subsidy for handling designated defense cases is very small compared with the interests entrusted by the parties to ordinary cases, which leads many lawyers to shirk their responsibilities. Even if you reluctantly accept the appointment and participate in the lawsuit, it is just a formality and perfunctory, which reflects the integrity of criminal proceedings. This directly affects the quality of appointed defense and the realization of the purpose of the law. (3) Lack of necessary trust relationship with juvenile defendants We know that lawyers and clients should establish close trust relationship. If there is no complete trust between them, it will be difficult for lawyers to successfully complete their defense tasks and strive for justice for the defendants to the maximum extent. In practice, we find that the system of appointed defense lawyers lacks the participation of juvenile defendants. Most defendants only met with the appointed defense lawyer once before the trial, and some cases did not even meet once before the trial. This leads the defendant to know nothing about the professional reputation, professional quality and professional skills of the appointed defense lawyer, distrust the appointed defense lawyer, and even think that the lawyer is a person sent by the judicial organs to extort confessions. In practice, it is not uncommon for juvenile defendants to accuse them of appointing a defense lawyer in court, or even deliberately retract their confessions and put forward different defense opinions from the appointed defense lawyer, which seriously affects the effective play of the appointed defense lawyer in court. Therefore, juvenile defendants can't effectively participate in the process of assigning defense, lacking both the right to choose and the right to refuse, which is not only conducive to improving the defense quality of defenders, but also conducive to realizing procedural justice and safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of defendants. (D) Lack of effective supervision over the quality and effectiveness of defense. In practice, for juvenile criminal cases requiring designated defense, the procedure for appointing defense lawyers to participate in criminal cases is usually as follows: first, the public security organ issues the Notice of Appointed Defender to the local judicial administrative department, and the judicial administrative department then appoints the law firm within its jurisdiction to undertake legal aid work, and the appointed law firm then appoints its own lawyer to undertake specific work, and the appointed lawyer receives remuneration from the judicial administrative department after completing the defense work. From this process, we can easily find that, according to the principle of equality of rights, responsibilities and interests, the actual client of the appointed defense lawyer is neither the judicial organ of the public security inspection law nor the juvenile criminal defendant, but the judicial administrative department that pays the legal aid fee specifically. Therefore, the appointed defense lawyer is ultimately only responsible to the judicial administrative department. However, in the investigation, we found that on the one hand, because the judicial administrative department does not directly participate in the handling of criminal cases, it only undertakes the work of appointing law firms and paying the remuneration of appointed defense lawyers, so it is impossible to effectively supervise the defense of appointed defense lawyers throughout the process; On the other hand, although the public security organs participate in the whole process of criminal cases and know the defense situation of appointed defense lawyers like the back of their hands, they have no right to supervise the laziness of appointed defense lawyers. This leads to the embarrassing situation that the departments with supervision power can't supervise because they can't participate in the whole process, and the departments without supervision power can find the slack of lawyers but can't supervise. Generally speaking, the plaintiff and the defendant will hire defense lawyers for themselves, defend themselves from a professional perspective, maximize their interests and win the case. However, due to improper guardianship, some minors are unable to hire a defense lawyer for themselves. The court will appoint an aid lawyer to serve them, but this is often far less effective than entrusting a lawyer. The problem needs the joint efforts of all sectors of our society to improve.