刑事和解制度适用的困境和完善路径探析
An Analysis of the Challenges in the Application of Criminal Reconciliation and Its Improvement Pathways
摘要: 随着我国社会治安形势的持续向好,重罪比例不断下降,犯罪结构发生了显著变化,我国刑事司法理念也实现了与时俱进的转变,从传统的单纯治罪模式逐步迈向以治理为核心的现代化司法路径。刑事和解制度作为这一转型的重要体现,已成功突破传统对抗性诉讼的局限,成为恢复性司法视野下一项极具价值的关键制度,它契合了当前轻罪治理的核心目标,即注重修复因犯罪行为受损的社会关系,推动社会治理的精细化与人性化发展。但目前刑事和解制度还存在诸多问题,在适用过程中逐渐边缘化,究其原因,在于认罪认罚从宽制度与刑事和解制度的重叠、适用范围的模糊、适用方式的不合理,和解协议的效力难以保证等。本文以刑事和解制度的功能价值为切入点,深入剖析其在实践中的适用困境,并在此基础上积极探索完善路径,提出有针对性的建议,旨在通过修复刑事和解制度在适用过程中存在的问题,充分释放其制度活力,进而推动刑事诉讼在国家治理现代化进程中发挥更为积极的作用,为建设和谐中国、法治中国贡献重要力量。
Abstract: With the continuous improvement of China’s social security situation, the proportion of serious crimes has been declining, leading to significant changes in the criminal structure. China’s criminal justice philosophy has also evolved in tandem with the times, transitioning from a traditional punitive model to a modern judicial approach centered on governance. As a key manifestation of this transformation, the criminal reconciliation system has successfully broken through the limitations of traditional adversarial litigation, emerging as a highly valuable mechanism under the framework of restorative justice. It aligns with the core objectives of current light crime governance, which emphasize repairing social relationships damaged by criminal behavior and promoting refined, humanized social governance. However, the criminal reconciliation system still faces numerous challenges, gradually becoming marginalized in practice. The root causes lie in the overlap between the leniency system for admitting guilt and accepting punishment and the criminal reconciliation system, ambiguous scope of application, unreasonable implementation methods, and the difficulty in ensuring the enforceability of reconciliation agreements. This paper takes the functional value of the criminal reconciliation system as a starting point, thoroughly analyzing its practical implementation dilemmas. Based on this, it actively explores improvement pathways and proposes targeted recommendations. The aim is to address the existing issues in the system’s application, fully unleash its institutional vitality, and thereby enhance the role of criminal litigation in advancing the modernization of national governance. This will contribute significantly to building a harmonious and rule-of-law China.
文章引用:刘雪瑶. 刑事和解制度适用的困境和完善路径探析[J]. 争议解决, 2026, 12(6): 1-7. https://doi.org/10.12677/ds.2026.126176

参考文献

[1] 秦宗文. 刑事和解制度的实践困境与破解之道[J]. 四川大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2015(2): 151-160.
[2] 李佳威. 论认罪认罚从宽制度中的被害人参与: 兼议与刑事和解制度的区分与衔接[J]. 辽宁公安司法管理干部学院学报, 2021(3): 77-83.
[3] 吴四江. “锥形结构”: 被害人之当事人地位的实现模式[J]. 政治与法律, 2012(10): 89-97.
[4] 王艳慧. 刑事和解制度的运行机理与逻辑缺陷——兼评我国《刑事诉讼法》第277-279条[J]. 法学杂志, 2014, 35(4): 79-88.
[5] 虞浔. 从社会治理的参与者到社会治理的推动者——基于“寻乌经验”司法治理模式的思考[J]. 法学, 2023(12): 20-33.
[6] 黄祖合. 刑事和解理论与实务研究[M]. 北京: 中国政法大学出版社, 2022: 295.
[7] 卞建林, 张可. 构建中国式认罪协商制度: 认罪认罚从宽制度的反思与重构[J]. 政法论坛, 2024, 42(4): 13-26.
[8] 梁德阔. 论人民调解的适用范围——基于民间纠纷的考察[J]. 民间法, 2023, 31(1): 219-232.
[9] 景汉朝. 新时代“枫桥经验”的基本问题与法治化构建[J]. 政法论坛, 2024, 42(2): 86-97.
[10] 姚显森. 刑事和解适用中的异化现象及防控对策[J]. 法学论坛, 2014, 29(5): 125-133.
[11] 向鹏, 张书炜. 刑事和解制度在司法适用中存在的问题及完善路径探析[J]. 安顺学院学报, 2024, 26(4): 130-135.
[12] 王惠贤. 轻罪治理背景下刑事和解制度适用的困境与完善[J]. 河北法律职业教育, 2024, 2(8): 71-75.
[13] 李雪菁. 我国刑事和解制度探析[J]. 广西教育学院学报, 2020(1): 62-65.
[14] 赵恒. 认罪认罚与刑事和解的衔接适用研究[J]. 环球法律评论, 2019, 41(3): 133-147.
[15] 卞建林. 轻罪治理的程序响应[J]. 中国刑事法杂志, 2024(2): 34-54.
[16] 陈瑜, 米卿. 刑事和解中民间纠纷认定问题分析[J]. 中国检察官, 2013(22): 61-62.
[17] 吕晓刚. 刑事和解制度调解机制构建研究[J]. 湖南警察学院学报, 2019, 31(1): 84-90.
[18] 李奋飞, 吴琼. 轻微犯罪程序应对的实践争议与理论检讨[J]. 河北法学, 2025, 43(7): 38.
[19] 段雄, 邱林明. 关于刑事和解制度的思考——以交通肇事案件为切入点[J]. 人民法治, 2018(22): 62-63.
[20] 娄义鹏. 刑事和解制度的完善[J]. 法商研究, 2024, 41(6): 3-18.