少捕慎诉慎押刑事司法政策对我国审查起诉工作的开展提出了新的要求，在起诉必要性审查工作如火如荼推进的当下，如何构建起诉必要性审查统一标准，提升起诉必要性审查质效成为亟待解决的问题。本文从起诉必要性审查基础理论切入，结合立法和司法实践分析我国起诉必要性审查标准现实问题，并通过借鉴比较法上的经验，提出对我国起诉必要性审查标准的原则、功用、内容和运用等的构建设想。

文章共分为五个部分：

绪论部分集中介绍了本文的研究背景、研究现状、研究意义以及研究方法，明确了我国起诉必要性审查标准有待进一步研究。

第一章对起诉必要性审查的基本问题进行梳理和厘清。首先从起诉必要性审查问题的产生开始，明确了起诉必要性审查的案件范围及审查目的，界定了起诉必要性审查的基本概念；其次从起诉便宜主义、刑法谦抑理论、诉讼经济原则及修复性正义原则四个方面探讨了起诉必要性审查的理论基础；最后明晰了起诉必要性审查作为审查起诉的逆向结构制约、轻罪治理背景下的实质出罪机制以及公诉权正当化指引的价值定位。

第二章探究我国起诉必要性审查标准的应然功能与现实反思。首先明确我国起诉必要性审查标准在激活起诉裁量权使用、规范起诉必要性审查和提升起诉工作效果的应然功能，其次梳理我国起诉必要性审查标准相关的法律规范与实践案例，最后以现实情况为对照呈现我国起诉必要性审查标准存在的问题。

第三章结合英国、日本起诉必要性审查标准经验做比较法研究。通过查找并梳理两国起诉必要性审查标准的最新资料，总结两国审查的总体标准，阐述具体含义并展开具体审查因素及其审查逻辑，最后分析提炼两国起诉必要性审查标准对我国构建审查标准的借鉴意义。

第四章在上文分析的基础上，尝试探究并构建我国起诉必要性审查标准。应当坚持慎诉、客观优于主观、社会公共利益补充、国家利益优先的起诉必要性审查基本原则，以轻罪案件为核心展开，按照犯罪情节因素、个人特征因素、社会公共利益因素和国家重大利益因素层层推进审查，以实现犯罪多元治理目标。

The criminal justice policy of "fewer arrest, prudent prosecution, and prudent detention" has put forward new requirements for the development of China's review and prosecution work. In the current situation where the review of the necessity of prosecution is in full swing, how to construct unified standards for the prosecution necessity review and improve the quality and efficiency of the work has become an urgent problem to be solved. This article starts from the basic theory of the necessity of prosecution, analyzes the practical problems of the standards for the prosecution necessity review in China through legislation and judicial practice, and proposes construction ideas for the principles, functions, content, and application of the standards for the prosecution necessity review in China by drawing on the experience of comparative law.

The article is divided into five parts:

The introduction section focuses on introducing the study background, current study status, significance, and methods of this article, and clarifies the need for further study on the standards for the prosecution necessity review in China.

Chapter One sorts out and clarifies the basic issues of the prosecution necessity review. Firstly, starting from the emergence of the issue of the prosecution necessity review, the scope and purpose of the case were clarified, and the basic concept was defined; Secondly, the theoretical basis for the review of the prosecution necessity review was explored from four aspects: the doctrine of prosecuting discretion, the principle of restraint in criminal law, the principle of economic litigation, and the principle of restorative justice; Finally, the value positioning of the prosecution necessity review as a reverse structural constraint for review and prosecution work, the substantive decriminalization mechanism in the context of minor crimes governance, and the guidance for the legitimacy of the right to prosecution were clarified.

Chapter Two explores the expected function and practical reflection of the standards for the prosecution necessity review in China. Firstly, it is necessary to clarify the functions of China's standards in activating the use of prosecution discretion, regulating the review of necessity of prosecution, and improving the effectiveness of prosecution work. Secondly, it is necessary to review the relevant legal norms and practical cases of China's standards for the prosecution necessity review. Finally, by comparing with the actual situation, the problems of China's standards are presented.

Chapter Three conducts comparative law research based on the experience of the standards for the prosecution necessity review in the UK and Japan. By searching and sorting out the latest information in both countries, summarizing the overall standards in both countries, elaborating on the specific meanings and exploring the specific review factors and review logic, and finally analyzing and refining the standards for the prosecution necessity review in both countries, the reference significance for China's construction of standards is analyzed.

On the basis of the previous analysis, Chapter Four attempts to explore and construct the standards for the prosecution necessity review in China. We should adhere to the basic principles of prudence, objectivity over subjectivity, prioritizing national interests, and supplementing social public interests, with minor crime cases as the core, and promote the review layer by layer according to the factors of criminal circumstances, personal characteristics, social public interests, and major national interests, in order to achieve the goal of diversified governance of crimes.