禁止双重危险原则的历史发展及其启示

河南省政法管理干部学院学报2005年第3期(总第90期)禁止双重危险原则的历史发展及其启示叶良芳1刘志高2(12,100872):禁止双重危险原则发轫于罗马法一事不再理原则,为许多国家的宪法或刑事诉讼法所规定,是现代刑事司法的一项基石原则确立这一原则是基于以下价值理念:保护人权防止错判减少精神损害维护既判力和促进侦查高效进行这一原则在两个方面制约国家刑罚权的启动:一是对上诉的限制;二是对重新起诉的限制但最近,这一原则有所松动许多国家在立法上规定了这一原则例外的适用,或者通过法律委员会建议这一原则应有例外,允许在特殊情形下重审无罪裁决案件,或者允许检察官对无罪裁决提起上诉这一变化对我国重构刑事再审制度具有积极的借鉴意义:禁止双重危险原则;理念;例外;刑事再审制度:D925.2:A:1008-6951(2005)03-0153-08,,?,,,5,,14,,(theruleagainstdoublejeopardy),,,,(pleasofautrefoisacquit)(pleasofautrefoisconvict)(nonbisinidem),,,,!1969::(1);(2);(3)∀,()(actioconsumituv),153!∀ChristopherOsakwe,TheBillofRightsfortheCriminalDefendantinAmericanLaw,inHumanRightsinCriminalProcedure,p.260,1982byMartinusNijhoffPublishers.(.[M].:,2003.174),#∃(,2004.2028):2005-02-13:1.(1973-),,,;2.(1973-),,,,,,,,,,[1],,(resjudicata),,,,,,,,6#∃,:[2],,1791,[3]368:,,1946392:271(4)(5):,;,,1163%%,,,,,#∃,:,;;;[4]1176,,13,,,,,17,,;(),;,,,,1641#∃:1648,,,,1789,&&&#∃,5:1982#∃11(h):,,;,1990#∃262:,,,,,154,,1966#∃147:,1969#∃84:1984#∃74:(1),,(2),,,(3)15,1998#∃20:(1),,;(2),;(3),,,:1.,,,,,,,,,,:(),,,,()[5]2.,:,,,,,,,,,,3.,,,,,&&&[6],156:,,,,,∋∋,,[7],4.,,,,,,,,,,,,:,,155[8]267:,,,,,,,∋∋[9]5.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,:1.(1),,,,,,:,,,;,,,,,,,,,,,,,(2),,,,,,,,,,(3),,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2.,,,,,,(1),156,,,,,1964,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,[10],,,,,,&&&,,,,,,,,,,(2),,,,,,,,ABC,ABD,,,,:,;,,,;,,(3)#∃359,,,,,,,,,,,,,1956,,:,,1958368:,,,,,,,,,,,,[11],,157,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1.1996,#∃,,,,,,,,,,:(1),;(2),;(3);(4),,,,,,,,19997%,,,,,,,(38),:(a),;(b):,,,;,,,,,,[12]200210,#2002∃()10,,,,,(63),,,(65)(66)(68),,#2002∃49,(50),,,,,(51),(55)(56),2.,158[13]:1985218,%%%151973413,(),,,1985314,19851127,,,,,,,,19992122000828,,,,,,;,,2000113,,,,,,,,,,,,;,,,,,:,,;,,,:(1),,;(2),,,,,1997,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,1998#∃,2004,159,,,,,,;,,,,,,:[1]张卫平.程序公正实现中的冲突与衡平[M].成都:成都出版社,1993.348-350.[2]JayA.Sigler,DoubleJeopardy(NewYork:CornellUniversityPress)(1969),p2.[3][法]卡斯东%斯特法尼等.法国刑事诉讼法精义(下)[M].罗结珍译.北京:中国政法大学出版社,1998.877.[4]参见ConstitutionofClarendon条.薛波.元照英美法词典[Z].北京:法律出版社,2003.303.[5][1957]355U.S.184,at187-189.[6]MonroeG.Mckay,DoubleJeopardy:ArethePiecesthePuzzle?(1983)23WashburnLawJournal1,18.转引自张毅.刑事诉讼中禁止双重危险规则论[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.72.[7]LCCPNo.156,para.4.7.[8]ChandrasekharnPhillaiK.N.,DoubleJeopardyProtection:AComparativeOverview,Delhi,India,MittalPublication(1988),p.45.转引自姚剑波.终局性利益下的规则平衡[J].比较法研究,2000,(4).[9]LawCom.No.267,para.4.12.[10]张毅.刑事诉讼中禁止双重危险规则论[M].北京:法律出版社,2004.217.[11]姚剑波.终局性利益下的规则平衡[J].比较法研究,2000,(4).[12]UnitedKingdomLaw,ReportNo267,DoubleJeopardyandProsecutionAppeals(2001),Cmnd5048.[13]Carroll(2002)77ALJR157;[2002]HCA55.:OntheDevelopmentoftheRuleagainstDoubleJeopardyandItsRevelationYeLiangfang,LiuZhigao(LawSchool,RenminUniversityofChina,Beijing100872)Abstract:Theruleagainstdoublejeopardy,whichoriginatedfromtheprincipleofNonBisIdemintheRomanlaw,hasbeenstipulatedinconstitutionorcriminalprocedurallawinmanynationsandisconsideredacornerstoneofmoderncriminaljusticeadministration.Therearefiverationalesfordoublejeopardyprinciple:theneedforcivillibertarian,theriskofwrongfulconviction,thedistressofthetrialprocess,theneedforfinalityandtheneedtoencourageefficientinvestigation.Itfocusesonlimitinganationtolaunchpunishpowersthroughconfiningtheprosecutor(spowerstoappealandtoinitiatearetrialprocedure.However,atthesametime,thelawhasdevelopedanumberofexceptionstothebasicruleandmoreexceptionsissuggestedbythelawcommissionsintheUnitedKingdom,Australiaandsomeothercountries,whichpermitretrialofacquittedpersonsinanarrowrangeofcircumstances,andpermitprosecutionappealsagainstvariousformsoferroneousjudicialdirectionswhichhaveresultedinanacquittal.Itissuggestedthatweshoulddrawsomerevelationsfromthetrendforredevisingourcriminalretrialprocedure.Keywords:theruleagainstdoublejeopardy;rationale;exception;criminalretrialprocedure160