论文部分内容阅读
呼格吉勒图再审案和聂树斌再审案是两个相似并具有重大影响的大案。这两起冤案均发生于法治不彰的“严打”期间,并且均为“真凶出现”进而获得昭雪的结果。综观这两起再审案的实际运行及其运行结果,二者既有高度相似的背景因素和实体结果,也有不同的程序运行轨迹,更有因时间因素而导致的程序正义理念落实程度的差异。两起再审案的启动在本质上均属于非程序性的再审启动。两起再审案的实践再一次证明,我国审判监督程序的启动程序必须经受符合程序正义理念的改造。与呼格吉勒图再审案的存疑无罪判决相比,聂树斌再审案的存疑无罪判决更加符合程序正义的应有之义。没有贯彻回避和变更管辖这两种程序制度所体现的程序正义理念,是呼格吉勒图再审案的硬伤。聂树斌再审案的异地复查和最高人民法院提审则体现了裁判中立的程序正义立场,是程序正义理念的重大进步。
The case of recalling Hogwarts and the case of Nie Shubin retrial are two similar and significant cases. These two cases of injustice occurred during the “crackdown” period in which the rule of law was not honored, and all of them were “culprits appearing” and thus gaining prominence. Looking at the actual operation of these two retrial cases and their operation results, they have both highly similar background and substantive results as well as different trajectories of procedures, and moreover, they have differences in the implementation of the concept of procedural justice due to time factors. The launching of two retrial cases is essentially a non-procedural retrial. The practice of the two retrial cases once again proves that the starting procedure of the trial supervision procedure in our country must undergo the transformation in conformity with the concept of procedural justice. Compared with the judgment of innocent dictatorship in Hurghale retrial, the judgment of innocence by Nie Shubin retrial is more in line with the due justice of procedural justice. The concept of procedural justice embodied in the failure to implement the two procedural systems of avoidance and change of jurisdiction is a flawed re-trial of Hughes Gillette. The review of Nie Shubin’s retrial case in different places and the trial of the Supreme People’s Court embody the procedural justice position of referee neutrality, which is a significant step forward in the concept of procedural justice.