人民陪审员回避制度改革的法理与情感逻辑
|
摘要
作为中国特色社会主义司法制度不可或缺的组成部分,人民陪审制既是人民群众了解司法、亲近司法、参与司法的关键载体,也是国家治理体系与治理能力现代化在司法领域推进的重要抓手。然而,人民陪审制在司法审判实务工作中的表现不尽如人意,不仅展示司法民主、体现司法公开、促进司法公正的功能没能切实履行,反倒因人民陪审员时常陷入"陪而不审、审而不议、议而不决"境地而有成为"法庭上的稻草人"之嫌。尽管《人民陪审员法》是近年来我国人民陪审制改革理论探索与试点经验的集大成之作,但其中有个别条文仍存在不合理之处,尤其是有关回避制度的规定,将作为业余参与者的陪审员与身为职业法律人的审判员按同等条件对待,无助于实现促进司法公正、提高司法公信力的目标,需要另行规划适合人民陪审员特点的回避机制。
As an indispensable part of the socialist judicial system with Chinese characteristics, the people's jury system is not only a key carrier for the people to understand the judiciary, get close to the judiciary, and participate in the judiciary, but also an important step for the advancement of the national governance system and governance capacity in judicial field. However, the people's jury system does not work satisfactorily in practice. Not only are the functions of demonstrating judicial democracy, embodying judicial openness, and promoting judicial justice not fully brought into play,but the people's jurors often do not play their proper roles and thus are nothing more than "scarecrows in the court".Although the Law of People's Jurors epitomizes the theoretical exploration and experimental experience of the people's jury system reform in recent years, there are still some unreasonable provisions, the provisions on the challenge system in particular, which treat jurors who are amateur participants in the judiciary the same as judges who are professional jurists.This does not help realize the goal of promoting judicial justice and improving judicial credibility. Therefore,we need to design a challenge system in line with the characteristics of the people's jury system.
As an indispensable part of the socialist judicial system with Chinese characteristics, the people's jury system is not only a key carrier for the people to understand the judiciary, get close to the judiciary, and participate in the judiciary, but also an important step for the advancement of the national governance system and governance capacity in judicial field. However, the people's jury system does not work satisfactorily in practice. Not only are the functions of demonstrating judicial democracy, embodying judicial openness, and promoting judicial justice not fully brought into play,but the people's jurors often do not play their proper roles and thus are nothing more than "scarecrows in the court".Although the Law of People's Jurors epitomizes the theoretical exploration and experimental experience of the people's jury system reform in recent years, there are still some unreasonable provisions, the provisions on the challenge system in particular, which treat jurors who are amateur participants in the judiciary the same as judges who are professional jurists.This does not help realize the goal of promoting judicial justice and improving judicial credibility. Therefore,we need to design a challenge system in line with the characteristics of the people's jury system.
引文
[1]王亚明.域外陪审制度模式评介与借鉴[J].深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2016,(6):107-113.
[2]施鹏鹏.陪审制与参审制的共性与差异[J].学海,2007,(5):156-160.
[3]易延友.陪审团在衰退吗———当代英美陪审团的发展趋势解读[J].现代法学,2004,(3):45-52.
[4]周永坤.司法的地方化、行政化、规范化———论司法改革的整体规范化理路[J].苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2014,(6):59-64.
[5]张嘉军.人民陪审制度:实证分析与制度重构[J].法学家,2015,(6):1-14.
[6]廖永安,刘方勇.社会转型背景下人民陪审员制度改革路径探析[J].中国法学, 2012,(3):147-159.
[7]冯江菊.司法大众化的解读与提倡———人民司法的本意回归[J].国家行政学院学报,2009,(5):50-54.
[8]荆龙.扩大司法民主促进司法公开实现司法专业判断与群众朴素认知的有机统一[N].人民法院报,2017-12-23(001).
[9]余涛.我们需要何种法律教育———从法律职业伦理道德困境谈起[J].法学教育研究,2011,(1):53-69+413.
[10]张薇薇.法袍与法文化[J].法律科学(西北政法学院学报),2000,(5):19-27.
[11]张友好.论我国申请法官回避的现状及改革[J].清华法学, 2012, 6(4):152-162.
[12]李拥军.“政治之重”与“司法之轻”:我国当下人民陪审制度的社会价值与存在基础[J].社会科学辑刊,2012,(5):70-74.
[13]王福华,张士利.民事诉讼回避制度的两个基本问题[J].法学论坛,2005,(6):107-111.
[14]韩波.论回避制度的根基:信息披露[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报), 2011,29(1):141-148.
[15]赵钢.回避制度之改良与保全机制之完善———以《民事诉讼法》修改为背景的思考[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2012,30(6):159-162.
[16]张晋红.民事诉讼回避事由的立法完善研究———基于立法技术的视角[J].广东财经大学学报,2006,(4):84-89.
[17]邓辉辉.关于完善民事诉讼回避制度的建议[J].法学杂志,2004,(6):61-62.
[18]范智欣,郭艺.我国审判人员信息披露制度的建构[J].广东财经大学学报,2006,(4):94-96.
[19]陈瑞华.无偏私的裁判者———回避与变更管辖制度的反思性考察[J].北大法律评论,2004,(1):38-79.
[20]王一怀.加拿大陪审法对“审前偏见”的救济制度[J].政治与法律,2003,(5):147-151.
[21]张品泽.外国刑事回避制度比较研究[J].比较法研究,2004,(3):91-107.
[22]胡荣.美国陪审员选任程序及其特色[N].人民法院报,2017-09-29(008).
[23]何帆.藐视法庭罪的前世今生[N].人民法院报,2015-08-28(005).
[24]傅郁林.分界·分层·分流·分类———我国民事诉讼制度转型的基本思路[J].江苏行政学院学报,2007,(1):108-113.
[2]施鹏鹏.陪审制与参审制的共性与差异[J].学海,2007,(5):156-160.
[3]易延友.陪审团在衰退吗———当代英美陪审团的发展趋势解读[J].现代法学,2004,(3):45-52.
[4]周永坤.司法的地方化、行政化、规范化———论司法改革的整体规范化理路[J].苏州大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2014,(6):59-64.
[5]张嘉军.人民陪审制度:实证分析与制度重构[J].法学家,2015,(6):1-14.
[6]廖永安,刘方勇.社会转型背景下人民陪审员制度改革路径探析[J].中国法学, 2012,(3):147-159.
[7]冯江菊.司法大众化的解读与提倡———人民司法的本意回归[J].国家行政学院学报,2009,(5):50-54.
[8]荆龙.扩大司法民主促进司法公开实现司法专业判断与群众朴素认知的有机统一[N].人民法院报,2017-12-23(001).
[9]余涛.我们需要何种法律教育———从法律职业伦理道德困境谈起[J].法学教育研究,2011,(1):53-69+413.
[10]张薇薇.法袍与法文化[J].法律科学(西北政法学院学报),2000,(5):19-27.
[11]张友好.论我国申请法官回避的现状及改革[J].清华法学, 2012, 6(4):152-162.
[12]李拥军.“政治之重”与“司法之轻”:我国当下人民陪审制度的社会价值与存在基础[J].社会科学辑刊,2012,(5):70-74.
[13]王福华,张士利.民事诉讼回避制度的两个基本问题[J].法学论坛,2005,(6):107-111.
[14]韩波.论回避制度的根基:信息披露[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报), 2011,29(1):141-148.
[15]赵钢.回避制度之改良与保全机制之完善———以《民事诉讼法》修改为背景的思考[J].法律科学(西北政法大学学报),2012,30(6):159-162.
[16]张晋红.民事诉讼回避事由的立法完善研究———基于立法技术的视角[J].广东财经大学学报,2006,(4):84-89.
[17]邓辉辉.关于完善民事诉讼回避制度的建议[J].法学杂志,2004,(6):61-62.
[18]范智欣,郭艺.我国审判人员信息披露制度的建构[J].广东财经大学学报,2006,(4):94-96.
[19]陈瑞华.无偏私的裁判者———回避与变更管辖制度的反思性考察[J].北大法律评论,2004,(1):38-79.
[20]王一怀.加拿大陪审法对“审前偏见”的救济制度[J].政治与法律,2003,(5):147-151.
[21]张品泽.外国刑事回避制度比较研究[J].比较法研究,2004,(3):91-107.
[22]胡荣.美国陪审员选任程序及其特色[N].人民法院报,2017-09-29(008).
[23]何帆.藐视法庭罪的前世今生[N].人民法院报,2015-08-28(005).
[24]傅郁林.分界·分层·分流·分类———我国民事诉讼制度转型的基本思路[J].江苏行政学院学报,2007,(1):108-113.