Discussion on the Causes and Solutions of “Pit-Occupying Defense”

本文围绕实务中委托辩护律师会见权受限现象展开，以劳荣枝案等典型案例引入，指出“占坑式辩护”即法律援助辩护挤占委托辩护空间的问题。从委托辩护能让被追诉人抗衡公权力、辩护更有效、节约司法资源及维护司法公信力等方面，分析其优先于指定辩护的正当性，深入剖析问题成因，包括刑事诉讼程序重配合轻对抗、指定辩护异化为固定证据手段、信息沟通不畅及缺乏有效制裁手段等，最后从扭转办案思路、拓宽知情渠道、完善救济权和规范指定辩护适用等方面提出解决路径，对推动司法进步具重要意义。This article focuses on the phenomenon of restricted right to meet with counsel in practice, introducing typical cases such as the Lao Rongzhi case, and points out the problem of “pit-occupying defense”, that is, the legal aid defense crowds out the space for entrusted defense. From the aspects that entrusted defense can enable the accused to confront public power, make the defense more effective, save judicial resources and maintain judicial credibility, this paper analyzes the legitimacy of entrusted defense taking precedence over appointed defense, deeply analyzes the causes of the problem, including the criminal procedure focusing on cooperation rather than confrontation, the appointed defense being alienated into a means of fixing evidence, poor information communication and the lack of effective sanctions, and finally puts forward solutions from the aspects of reversing the case-handling ideas, broadening the channels of information, improving the right of relief and standardizing the application of appointed defense, which is of great significance for promoting judicial progress.