刑事在线庭审满足了特殊时期审理刑事案件的需求，是司法信息化发展的产 物，在疫情防控期间起到了一定的社会作用，但同时也存在着立法缺失、侵害当 事人合法权利以及对庭审实质化造成冲击等问题。其中，当事人的诉讼权利保护 是完善刑事在线庭审应注意的重要问题。建立并完善刑事在线庭审选择制度，赋 予刑事案件当事人尤其是被告人在线庭审程序选择权，对于保护当事人诉讼权利，规范在线庭审，推进司法发展具有重要意义。

研究刑事在线庭审程序选择制度首先要明确在线诉讼、刑事在线庭审以及刑 事在线庭审程序选择的具体含义，理解在线庭审程序选择权作为程序性权利、程 序形成权以及共享性权利的法律性质。赋予当事人程序选择权可以看做是对刑事 在线庭审中可能会对当事人造成的权利减损的补偿措施。刑事在线庭审程序选择 根据理论及主体的不同可以进行不同的分类，其中法院在刑事在线庭审程序选择 中拥有审查权、被告人及被害人拥有程序选择权，但公诉人以及辩护人、证人等 其他诉讼参与人是否可以进行程序选择或者是否拥有程序选择权仍存在争议。在域外各国的司法实践中，澳大利亚法院最早适用视听连线的方式审理刑事案件并 形成了依申请适用和依职权适用两种刑事在线庭审选择方式。美国在 21 世纪初 就设立网络法院，并赋予当事人程序选择权。德国则更具特色，规定刑事在线庭 审程序只能由法院依职权启动，当事人及检察机关没有程序选择的权利。美国、 澳大利亚、德国三个国家刑事在线庭审实践较早，相关立法较为成熟，在程序选 择方面的规定对我国具有一定的借鉴意义。我国现有的司法解释确立了“全体合 意+法院审查”的在线庭审程序选择模式，但仍存在法律规范不足的情况，应围 绕程序选择权问题对程序选择制度进行细化规定。

疫情期间刑事案件在线庭审的适用在“量”上有了大幅提高，对维持刑事司 法正常进行，保障相关人员生命安全起到了重要作用。疫情过后，我国刑事案件 在线庭审适用显著减少，未来必然要向提高“质”的方向发展，进一步制度化、 规范化。本文将立足于刑事在线庭审程序选择的现有研究，借鉴域外经验，以程 序选择权为核心，系统地分析我国刑事在线庭审程序选择制度现状，并从细化法 律规范、规范程序选择程序、完善选择权救济、加快在线庭审平台建设等方面提 出建立、完善我国刑事在线庭审程序选择制度的建设性意见。

As a product of the development of judicial informatization, online criminal trial meets the needs of hearing criminal cases in special periods. It has played a certain social role during the epidemic prevention and control period, but at the same time, there are also problems such as lack of legislation, infringement of the legitimate rights of the parties and impact on the substantive trial. Among them, the protection of litigant's litigation rights is an important issue that should be paid attention to in perfecting criminal online trial. Establishing and improving the criminal online trial selection system, giving the parties in criminal cases, especially the defendants, the right to choose online trial procedures, is of great significance for protecting the litigation rights of the parties, standardizing online trial, and promoting judicial development. To study the online criminal trial procedure selection system, we must first clarify the specific meaning of online litigation, criminal online trial and criminal online trial procedure selection, and understand the legal nature of online trial procedure choice as procedural right, procedural formation right and sharing right. Giving procedural choice to the parties can be regarded as a compensatory measure to reduce the rights that may be caused to the parties in the criminal online trial. The selection of criminal online trial procedures can be classified according to different theories and subjects, in which the court has the right to review the selection of criminal online trial procedures, the defendant and the victim have the choice of procedures, but whether the public prosecutor, defenders, witnesses and other participants can choose procedures or whether they have the choice of procedures is still controversial. In the judicial practice of countries outside the region, Australian courts were the first to use audio-visual connection to try criminal cases and formed two criminal online trial selection methods: application by application and application by authority. In the early 21st century, the United States set up the Internet court and gave the parties procedural choices. Germany is more distinctive, which stipulates that some procedures of criminal online trial can only be started by the court according to the authority, and the parties and procuratorial organs have no right to choose the procedure. The practice of online criminal trial in the United States, Australia and Germany is relatively early, and the relevant legislation is mature, and the provisions of procedural selection can be of reference significance to our country. The existing judicial interpretation in China has established the online trial procedure selection mode of "consensus of all + court review", but there are still insufficient legal norms, and the procedure selection system should be detailed around the issue of procedure selection. During the epidemic period, the application of online trial in criminal cases has been greatly increased in terms of "volume", which has played an important role in maintaining the normal conduct of criminal justice and ensuring the life safety of relevant personnel. After the epidemic, the application of online court hearings in criminal cases in China has decreased significantly, and the future is bound to develop in the direction of improving "quality" and further institutionalize and standardize. Based on the existing research on the selection of criminal online court proceedings, this paper will draw on foreign experience, and take procedural choice as the core, systematically analyze the current situation of China's criminal online court proceedings selection system. And from the elaboration of legal norms, standardize the procedure selection procedure, improve the right to choose relief, accelerate the construction of online trial platform and so on, put forward constructive suggestions on establishing and improving the online trial procedure selection system of our country.