刑事缺席审判制度被告人异议权的知识解构与改革

2018年《刑事诉讼法》增设刑事缺席审判制度。为弥补刑事缺席审判制度之缺陷，赋予被告人异议权的救济机制实为必要。中国《刑事诉讼法》中规定的被告人异议权，一则立法对被告人异议权的具体规定导致其实际功能无法合理发挥；二则过度绝对化、无限化，被告人无须理由即可提出异议，且能达到足以推翻缺席审判的结果；三则没有明确异议权行使之具体内容，导致司法适用的模糊。这不仅会使刑事缺席审判制度存在的价值令人质疑、冲击中国司法权威，还会有碍党中央反腐败追逃追赃工作的顺利进行。据此，理应对被告人异议权进行有效限定和司法细化，明确其提起的条件、时间、具体行使方式以及相关配套制度的完善，从而对刑事缺席审判制度的有效适用提供助力。

Knowledge Deconstruction and Reform of Defendant's Right of Dissent in Criminal Trial by Defaul

In order to promote the smooth progress of national anti-corruption legislation and international recovery of stolen goods,the Criminal Procedure Law of 2018 added a criminal trial by default system. In order to make up for the defects of criminal trial by default system,it is necessary to give the defendant the right of dissent relief mechanism. The defendant''s right of objection stipulated in the Criminal Procedure Law of China,one is that the specific provisions of the legislation on the defendant''s right of dissent cause its actual function to be unable to play reasonably; the other is that it is excessively absolute and unlimited,the defendant can raise dissent without any reason,and it can achieve the result of overthrowing the lack of trial; the third is that the specific content of the exercise of the right of dissent is not clear,which leads to the ambiguity of judicial application. This will not only make the value of the criminal trial by default system questionable and impact on the judicial authority of China,but also hinder the smooth progress of the anti-corruption recovery work of the Party Central Committee. Therefore,the defendant''s right of dissent should be effectively limited and judicial refinement should be made,the conditions,time,specific ways of exercising and related supporting systems should be clarified,so as to provide assistance for the effective application of the criminal trial by default system.