华东师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版) ›› 2026, Vol. 58 ›› Issue (4): 85-95.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5579.2026.04.009

• 法律研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

低龄未成年犯核准追诉规定的理论表达与机制完善

杜文俊, 张涛   

  • 接受日期:2026-06-22 出版日期:2026-07-15 发布日期:2026-08-03
  • 作者简介:杜文俊,上海社会科学院研究员(上海,200020)
    张涛,同济大学法学院与德国康斯坦茨大学法学系联合培养博士研究生(上海,200092)
  • 基金资助:
    国家留学基金资助项目“国别和区域研究人才支持计划”(项目编号:202506260031)。

Theoretical Connotation and Mechanism Optimization of Prosecution Approval Provisions for Young Juvenile Offenders

Wenjun Du, Tao Zhang   

  • Accepted:2026-06-22 Online:2026-07-15 Published:2026-08-03

摘要:

下调刑事责任年龄是刑法适应社会发展的应然要求,但配套增设的低龄未成年犯核准追诉程序亦带来侵害涉案未成年人合法权益的风险。为最大限度降低立法调整衍生的法律风险,有必要厘清核准追诉规定的理论定位并完善其运行机制。该规定对应的实体要件是刑事责任能力,基于此体系定位,最高人民检察院的核准应严格限定于对涉案未成年人刑事责任能力的审查,其他要件的审查权则应归属受理案件的司法机关。在人权保障原则下,核准追诉程序的运行需坚守以下底线:其一,在核准决定前设立新型监管措施,确保审查期间涉案未成年人享有相对自主的生活与自由;其二,核准追诉决定权由最高人民检察院依法独立行使,其应秉持中立立场,采取“提审、听证与鉴定相结合”方式进行审查,并主动听取辩护人意见;其三,恪守核准不干预审理的基本原则,即准予追诉不影响司法机关基于事实错误、证据不足等法定事由对涉案未成年人作出无罪判决。

关键词: 低龄未成年犯, 核准追诉程序, 刑事责任能力, 新型监管措施, 核准不干预审理

Abstract:

Although lowering the statutory age of criminal responsibility reflects criminal law’s responsiveness to societal transformations, the supplementary newly-established prosecution approval procedures for young juvenile offenders may also risk violating the legitimate rights and interests of involved minors. It is imperative to rationally define the theoretical positioning of prosecution approval provisions and refine their operational mechanisms to minimize the risks of this legislative adjustment. The substantive criterion underpinning these provisions is criminal responsibility. Within this framework, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate’s prosecution approval authority should be confined to reviewing the criminal responsibility of young juvenile offenders, while the examination of other legal elements remains the responsibility of the handling judicial organs. Under the principle of human rights protection, the operational mechanism for the approval procedure must adhere to the following baselines: (1) Establishing novel supervision measures before approval decisions to safeguard the relative autonomy and freedom of young juvenile offenders’ lives during the review period; (2) ensuring that prosecution approval decisions are independently exercised by the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, which should adopt a neutral stance and employ a combined approach of interrogation, hearing and expert evaluation for review, while actively soliciting opinions from defense counsel; and (3) establishing the fundamental principle that prosecution approval does not interfere with trial proceedings, clarifying that granting prosecution approval does not preclude the trial court from rendering an acquittal verdict for young juvenile offenders due to erroneous factual determinations, insufficient evidence, or other statutory grounds.

Key words: young juvenile offenders, prosecution approval procedure, criminal responsibility, novel supervision measures, prosecution approval without interference in trial proceedings