Aging and backwardness of the current law, surge in crime rates, lack of judicial resources, backlog of cases, disadvantages in self-admission procedure and the criminal special procedures etc., are the most critical issues of Macao SAR criminal proceedings at this moment. In this case, it is the trend to establish a criminal procedure, which is effective, fast and can save the judicial resources so as to improve the efficiency of litigation and optimize the allocation of resources. Therefore, this paper proposed that establishing Macao SAR plea bargaining procedure could solve above problems. The plea bargaining procedure is a groundbreaking procedure. Prosecutors, Defendants and their Advocates forms the main body of the consultation, based on the Defendant's consent to plead guilty in exchange for the Prosecutor's concessions in some way. For example, mitigating penalties, giving the accused lesser allegations or other favorable conditions. This paper summarize the different modes, forms and characteristics of this system in different countries by comparing the stipulations of the plea bargaining system between the United States, France, Italy and Taiwan. Therefore, respecting the local culture, resolving local issues, allocating power rationally and providing necessary criminal procedures are valuable experiences which should be taken into consideration by the Macao SAR in establishing a plea bargaining procedure. It is necessary to establish a plea bargaining procedure in Macau SAR, particularly in terms of improving the efficiency of criminal proceedings. At the same time, public awareness, local systems and regulations which is no fatal obstacles to be found so far. In addition, there are maturing Prosecutorial System, Lawyer system, the Defendant and the Victim's system; Self-admission procedure, the Defendant pleaded guilty to the system for the reduction of sentence, which is similar with plea bargaining in Macao SAR. Therefore, the author concludes that Macao SAR is fully equipped to build the plea bargaining procedure. In the construction of this theory, the author suggests that limiting the scope of plea bargaining application to a maximum of three years' imprisonment, juvenile and recidivist criminal cases are not included. Prosecutors, judges, suspects and their defenders, victims and their agents should be list in the main body. The defendant's sentencing would be reduced to a maximum of one-third if he chose the plea bargaining procedure. Moreover, appropriate relieving procedures should be established which could keep the stability of the transaction process. By increasing the costs of agreement withdrawal could ensure they make a carefully considered decision. Keywords: the current of Macao SAR; plea bargaining; procedures establishing

現行法老化及落後、犯罪率飆升、司法資源缺乏、案件積壓、自認制度及刑事特别程序分流功能發揮不足等，是澳門特區刑事程序現階段較為突出的問题。在此情况下，建立一項有效、快捷、節省司法資源的刑事程序是大勢所趨。務求藉此提升訴訟效率、優化資源配置。 為此，本文主張構建澳門特區式認罪協商制度，以供解决上述問题。 認罪協商制度是一项突破性制度，檢察官或被告人及其辯護人作為協商提出主體，以被告人同意作認罪答辯為基礎，換取檢察官在某方面的讓步。例如，减輕刑罚，给予被告人較輕指控、或其他有利條件的承諾等。 本文通過對比美國、法國、意大利、中國台灣地區對認罪協商制度規定，總结出此制度在不同國家呈現不同的運作模式、形式及其特點。因此，尊重本地文化及著眼解决本地問题、合理分配權力、提供所需刑事程序配套，是澳門特區在構建認罪協商程序時應當参考的寳貴經驗。 澳門特區具有構建認罪協商制度的必要性，尤其在改善刑事程序效率方面。同时，在公衆認知、本地現行制度及法規等方面，並未發現致命性的障礙因素。除此之外，澳門特區具有備日趨成熟的檢查制度、律師制度、被告人與被害人的保障制度；具有原理相似的自認制度，以被告人認罪換取刑期減少的制度。因此，筆者認為澳門特區已完全具備構建認罪協商的基礎。 在澳門特區式認罪協商制度理論構建方面，筆者建議将適用範圍限制在可科處最高不超過3年徒刑的犯罪，但不包括未成年人及累犯的刑事案件。檢察官、法官、嫌犯及其辯護人、被害人及其代理人等均應列入主體犯罪。被告人選擇認罪協商程序的量刑優惠是徒刑或罰金最高限度減三分之一。另外，亦應制定相應的救濟程序，通過增加控辯雙方撤回協議的成本，務求他們作出交易决定是經過慎重考慮，從而保障交易程序的穩定性。 關鍵字：澳門現狀，認罪協商，制度構建