China News Service, December 8th. The Supreme Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, and the Ministry of Justice jointly issued the "Opinions on Strengthening the Substantive Trial of Sentence Reduction and Parole Cases" (hereinafter referred to as the "Opinions") on the 8th.
Luo Zhiyong, the deputy chief of the Supreme Court of Justice Supervision, said at a press conference that the "Opinions" emphasized the basic requirements of substantive trials and guaranteed that commutation and parole would only be applied to criminals who have shown repentance.
In terms of the main content of the "Opinions", Luo Zhiyong introduced that there are 20 articles in the "Opinions", including four aspects: accurately grasping the basic requirements of substantive trial, strictly reviewing the substantive conditions, effectively strengthening the mechanism of case handling procedures, vigorously strengthening supervision and guidance and work guarantees. In terms of further details, the work requirements for the substantive trial of commutation and parole cases have been further refined.
The first is to emphasize the basic requirements of a substantive trial.
The fundamental purpose of commutation and parole is to motivate criminals to actively reform. To achieve this goal, it must be ensured that commutation and parole are only applicable to criminals who do show repentance. How to examine whether offenders do show repentance is the focus of practice. , Is also difficult.
In order to further change the judicial concept and ensure the accurate and fair application of commutation and parole, the "Opinions" put forward the four basic requirements of insisting on a comprehensive legal review, subjective and objective reform performance, strict review of evidence and materials, and differentiated treatment.
The core is not only to examine the criminal’s objective reform performance, but also to examine whether the criminal is subjectively genuinely repentant and whether he truly recognizes the serious social harm caused by his criminal behavior.
Through a comprehensive investigation of criminals’ original convictions, subjective malignancy, and sentence reformation, different criminals are treated differently according to the situation when they are commuted and released on parole, so as to better implement the criminal policy of combining leniency and strictness.
The second is to refine the specific criteria for rigorously reviewing entity conditions.
The "Opinions" addresses issues that are difficult to grasp and are prone to deviations in practice, and put forward the key points that should be paid attention to in the review process, and clarified specific review methods.
For example, with regard to the scoring and assessment materials of criminals, the source of the assessment scores and their rationality should be carefully reviewed. If there are doubts, the penalty enforcement agency should be required to provide explanations or supplements within the prescribed time limit.
In another example, in addition to clarifying the matters that should be reviewed, the review and judgment of criminals’ meritorious deeds and major meritorious services also emphasizes the identification of “major contributions” and “major contributions” in major meritorious services. Positive influence, not just contribution and help to individual personnel and units.
In addition, the "Opinions" also provide for the review of whether offenders applying for parole are at risk of re-offending, and how to strictly grasp the actual sentence of the offender after commutation.
The third is to introduce a series of measures to strengthen the mechanism of case handling procedures.
In response to issues such as commutation and parole trials that tend to be mere formalities, the "Opinions" make clear and specific details in terms of giving full play to the functions of court trials, improving the system of witnesses to testify in court, effectively exercising the power of out-of-court investigation and verification, and strengthening the role of trial organizations. Regulation.
Objectively speaking, if these regulations are to be truly implemented in judicial practice, it is necessary for the political and legal agencies to further change their concepts and work hard to break the system and mechanism obstacles in the work of commutation and parole.
In the next step, we will further improve the level of informatization construction and application, use scientific and technological means to improve the quality and efficiency of case handling, strengthen the supervision of power operation, and promote the treatment of stubborn diseases with both symptoms and root causes and permanent treatment.
The fourth is to clarify the supporting system for supervision, guidance and job security.
The "Opinions" attaches great importance to the construction of systems and mechanisms for restricting supervision. Aiming at the operation of power in the handling of cases of commutation and parole, it strives to build an all-round restriction and supervision system that integrates internal supervision and external supervision.
It is emphasized that higher-level agencies should strengthen guidance to the next. The Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate will issue guiding cases in due course to provide guidance for relevant agencies in handling cases in accordance with the law.
People’s courts, people’s procuratorates, and penal enforcement agencies must fully understand the new situation, new tasks, and new requirements facing commutation and parole work. The substantive trial of parole cases was conducted in a fair and efficient manner.
"In short, the promulgation of the "Opinions" is a major reform measure in the field of commutation and parole. It is of great significance for further changing judicial concepts and ensuring fair and impartial case trials." Luo Zhiyong said.