What should we pay attention to in the system of pleading guilty, admitting punishment and not prosecuting?

First, we must ensure that the defendant pleads guilty and repents voluntarily. In order to avoid falling into the "trap" where innocent people are forced to plead guilty, when designing the system of "combining leniency with severity to plead guilty and punish", it is suggested that: First, the voluntary nature of pleading guilty and punishing should be clearly stipulated. "Pleading guilty" means that the defendant voluntarily confessed his crime and accepted the court trial, not out of coercion or fraud. It is best to list these involuntary factors for practical operation. "Pleading guilty and admitting punishment" means that on the basis of pleading guilty, criminal suspects and defendants voluntarily accept the penalty consequences brought by pleading guilty, admit the simplification of litigation procedures, that is, give up part of their legal litigation rights in ordinary procedures, and agree to be convicted and sentenced by applying the derogation of some litigation rights such as court investigation and debate. Second, if the defendant voluntarily makes a corresponding confession, he should obtain information commensurate with it for him to choose whether to plead guilty or not. In order to ensure voluntariness and reduce the risk of confrontation between the prosecution and the defense, the application of this system actually requires the case-handling organ to disclose the evidence materials about its case to the defendant. Third, we should pay attention to the provisions of the existing criminal procedure law and other laws on the social investigation report system to help judges fully understand whether the defendant pleaded guilty or not for other objective reasons. Fourth, ensure that criminal suspects and defendants get substantive rather than formal lawyer help and consultation. The second is to ensure that the defendant voluntarily pleads guilty and is given a lighter punishment on the premise of obtaining effective legal help. In order to prevent the defendant from pleading guilty without effective legal aid, the following suggestions are made in the system design: first, the evaluation system of legal aid lawyers' professional access qualifications and responsibilities should be clarified, the management of legal aid funds should be strengthened, and the construction of legal aid system should be strengthened. For legal aid lawyers in poor areas, financial input should be increased. So as to ensure that the poor defendants at the bottom of society can also get legal help, so as to ensure that the defendants voluntarily plead guilty and admit punishment with the help of effective lawyers. Second, China should learn from foreign practices, set up a compulsory defense system, and improve the legitimacy of confession and punishment. Compared with the procuratorial organ itself, the defendant is in a weak position, especially in the process of urging the defendant to choose to plead guilty and admit punishment. In order to embody the litigation spirit of equal confrontation between the prosecution and the defense, it is reasonable to set up a special compulsory defense system in the system of "pleading guilty and admitting punishment with leniency". Thirdly, in order to ensure the application of compulsory defense system to achieve substantial results, it is also very necessary to explore the feasibility of lawyers being present at the investigation and interrogation stage. The right of a criminal suspect to request the presence of a lawyer during investigation and interrogation is conducive to strengthening social supervision over the whole process of handling a case. Third, it is necessary to ensure that judges are judges in such cases and must not play the role of prosecution. In the process of applying the system of "pleading guilty with leniency" in handling cases, the court should mainly examine the basic contents such as the voluntariness of pleading guilty and the legality of the agreement between the prosecution and the defense, which is an inevitable requirement of adhering to the trial-centered litigation system. Specifically, it includes the following aspects: First, the defendant pleaded guilty and pleaded guilty voluntarily. Listen to the opinions of the defendant's defense lawyers in combination with his comprehensive performance in the investigation stage and the review and prosecution stage. The second is whether the defendant meets the legal conditions for the application of the system of pleading guilty and admitting punishment. Including whether it constitutes a confession and whether it meets the special requirements of the corresponding case type. Third, the legality of the agreement between the prosecution and the defense. It is mainly about the substantive consideration of conviction and sentencing, focusing on whether the facts ascertained by the court are consistent with those ascertained through consultation, and whether the agreement of pleading guilty and punishing violates the substantive provisions of criminal law. Fourthly, suggestions on the legality of applying the transfer procedure of the procuratorate. Since the application of the system of confession and punishment is reflected in both summary procedures and summary procedures, the court should focus on examining whether the legal conditions of different types of procedures meet and whether there is the possibility of program conversion. Fifth, whether there are other legal factors that are not applicable to the system of "pleading guilty and admitting punishment with leniency". Fourthly, based on clear facts and sufficient evidence, it is forbidden for prosecutors to negotiate between criminal suspects and criminals, and it is forbidden to apply the system of "pleading guilty and admitting punishment with leniency" in the investigation stage. This is the embodiment of China's long-term criminal policy of combining leniency with severity, and it is also the new development of this policy. Although criminal justice and its operation in different countries are universal, it does not mean that the reform of this system in China is a replica of the plea bargaining system. We also need to realize that the content of plea bargaining system in the United States includes both charges and the number of crimes. However, in the system design of our country, the consultation between the prosecution and the defense can only be based on the premise that the prosecution accuses the suspect and the defendant of being guilty, and the prosecution and the defense can reach an agreement on the possible benefits of the suspect's voluntary confession. In this process, it should be our basic bottom line to prohibit the transaction of crimes and the number of crimes. In addition, many plea bargaining in the United States is in exchange for the defendant's recognition of minor crimes when the facts of the case are controversial or the evidence is questionable. However, the system of "pleading guilty and accepting punishment with leniency" we implement must be carried out under the circumstances that the facts of the case are clear and the evidence is indeed sufficient. It is not allowed for judicial organs to make criminal suspects and defendants bear criminal responsibility and punishment under the circumstances of unclear facts and insufficient evidence, and to reduce or lighten the burden of proof of procuratorial organs. In addition, the system of confession and punishment should not be applied to the investigation stage. The application of confession and punishment system should be strictly restricted by litigation nodes, and it can only play a specific advantage in the stage of examination, prosecution and trial, but not in the stage of investigation. The reasons are as follows: First, the premise of confession and punishment is that the facts are clear and the evidence is indeed sufficient, and the investigation organ can only achieve this goal through comprehensive investigation and evidence collection. Therefore, the main task of the investigation stage is to collect evidence rather than plead guilty. Second, if the investigation organ is allowed to facilitate the negotiation of the suspect's confession, it may lead investigators to give up their legal verification duties, not to collect all kinds of evidence that can prove the suspect's innocence, and to rely too much on obtaining the suspect's confession to convict, which may lead to innocence. Thirdly, due to the natural advantages of the public power of the investigation organ and the secrecy of the investigation activities, once the investigation organ undertakes this function in the process of handling a case, it may take threats, inducements and other means to force the criminal suspect to choose to plead guilty and admit punishment in order to reduce the pressure of handling a case or for other purposes, thus becoming an inducement to cause unjust, false and misjudged cases. Five, "guilty plea and lenient punishment" legalization, enhance the predictability of criminal suspects and defendants. In the aspect of substantive criminal law, it is necessary to clearly evaluate the defendant comprehensively, universally and effectively. First of all, it should be upgraded to "should" (that is, mandatory) statutory circumstances in legislation, that is, if the defendant pleads guilty and admits punishment, the punishment should be lightened or mitigated, and the judge must apply this circumstance when sentencing and reflect it in the judgment results. Specifically, in the criminal law, it should be clear that the defendant should be treated leniently when he pleads guilty and admits punishment, and make it legal. It is suggested that those who plead guilty can be given a lighter or mitigated punishment, and those who commit minor crimes can be given a lighter or mitigated punishment. If the defendant pleads guilty and admits punishment, especially at the initial stage of litigation, and the case is filed as the main final evidence, the sentence should be reduced by one quarter to one third according to the punishment that should be imposed in this case, and the defendant should be encouraged to actively plead guilty and admit punishment to the maximum extent. Secondly, it must be noted that there are two forms of confession and punishment: surrender and confession. Frankly speaking, surrender means that the criminal's personal danger is relatively small, so the leniency of surrender should obviously be greater than confession. In the case of similar cases or other similar conditions, the lenient punishment of surrender should be greater than confession, so as to encourage criminals to actively plead guilty and admit punishment. Sixth, it is necessary to ensure that the victim participates in the defense transaction in substance. In China, it is also controversial whether the victim should become the subject of the system of "pleading guilty and admitting punishment with leniency". For example, there is a view that "pleading guilty should obtain the consent of the victim. The important condition is that the defendant should make moral and material compensation to the victim, and the victim agrees and is willing to accept an apology and material compensation." However, there are also views that "in order to ensure the application efficiency of the lenient system of pleading guilty and punishing, and to prevent the negotiation process from being changed at will because of the change of the victim's subjective feelings, the victim should not be a participant, which will have a substantial impact on the negotiation process of the case." We basically agree with the first view, that is, "confession and leniency" must be based on the consent of the victim, and compensation for the victim's damaged interests should be regarded as one of the reasonable conditions for the defendant to plead guilty and admit punishment, and the degree of compensation for the victim should be directly linked to the leniency that the defendant may obtain, so as to arouse the defendant's enthusiasm for actively compensating the victim. Among many criminals, there are many things that are very cultured. People who know the law may be very careful when carrying out some actions, and may think that the police can take him away without evidence.