Building Independent Procedures for the Plea Leniency System

SUN Daocui

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1001-4608.2022.06.012

2022-01-01

Abstract:Factors such as the epistemological bias, delayed institutional support, and insufficient support from the criminal justice environment have given rise to a lack of independence in the litigation procedures of plea leniency system. The major problems that this lack of independence has caused include: the “embedded” rather than “independent” application of the procedures; the double contradictions caused by the weakening of the “pre-trial leading” and the inability of the principle of “trial centeredness”; the negative effect of the “general” integration rather than “refined” differentiation of litigation; and the dilemma due to the “simplification” rather than “optimization” of procedural legitimacy. All this calls for the independence of the procedures involving the plea leniency system. In order to achieve this goal, it is necessary to resolve such issues as the diversion of case types and two independent litigation procedures; the simplification of the complexity of the trial procedures; the coordination between the pre-trial guidance and the observance of the principle of trial centeredness during the litigation process; the choice of conviction and sentencing under the “dual” procedure or “single procedure”; and the separation of the felony procedure and the misdemeanor procedure under the differential order of felony and misdemeanor. It is necessary to further clarify the elements of the leniency procedure for confirming guilt and punishment, and optimize the supporting measures.