我国法律援助值班律师制度的发展及完善

The Development and Improvement of the Duty Lawyer System for Legal Aid in China

摘要: 近年来，伴随认罪认罚制度发展完善而建立的值班律师制度，通过弥补辩护律师资源不足，保障被追诉人认罪认罚的自愿性。自2006年河南试点引入值班律师制度近二十年以来，在司法适用中保护被告的辩护权和个人权益保障方面发挥了显著卓绝的作用。有效法律帮助要求具备及时且易获取的特性，同时涵盖标准化的程序与内容。然而这项制度在实际运行中也暴露出立法定位与实践效果背离、“值班”模式与诉讼规律脱节、审前中心主义导致阶段失衡等问题。针对以上问题，本文先从值班律师的本源职能与制度定位入手探寻值班律师制度在我国刑事诉讼中的功能定位，回顾其制度演变从试点探索到权利扩张，分析值班律师“法律帮助”的有效性。其次具体分析值班律师制度运行的具体困境，以及其中的缘由——权利行使受限、权利保障缺位、角色定位模糊、配套机制不健全、监督机制失效和认罪认罚制度下的职能错位。在本文中提出了一些如值班律师公设化改革、“师徒型”公益模式高校力量介入、建立两层分层分流机制、律师协会提升监督与自律等完善措施，从而为被追诉人提供有效的法律服务。

Abstract: In recent years, the duty lawyer system, established along with the development and improvement of the guilty plea and criminal settlement system, has played a significant role in ensuring the voluntariness of the accused’s guilty plea and settlement by compensating for the shortage of defense lawyers. Since its pilot introduction in Henan in 2006, the duty lawyer system has been in operation for nearly two decades and has played a remarkable role in protecting the defense rights and human rights of defendants in judicial practice. Effective legal assistance requires the characteristics of being timely and easily accessible, as well as covering standardized procedures and contents. However, this system has also exposed problems in actual operation, such as the deviation between the legislative positioning and practical effects, the disconnection between the “duty” model and litigation rules, and the stage imbalance caused by the pretrial centrism. To address these issues, this article first explores the functional positioning of the duty lawyer system in China’s criminal procedure from the perspective of its original function and institutional positioning, reviews its institutional evolution from pilot exploration to rights expansion, and analyzes the effectiveness of the “legal assistance” provided by duty lawyers. Secondly, it specifically analyzes the specific difficulties in the operation of the duty lawyer system and the reasons behind them - restricted exercise of rights, lack of rights protection, ambiguous role positioning, incomplete supporting mechanisms, ineffective supervision mechanisms, and functional misplacement under the guilty plea and criminal settlement system. This article proposes some improvement measures such as the public defender reform of duty lawyers, the “mentor-apprentice” public welfare model with the intervention of university forces, the establishment of a two-level hierarchical diversion mechanism, and the improvement of supervision and self-discipline by the bar association, in order to provide effective legal services to the accused.