法治视野下对ADR的审视与构建
|
摘要
非诉讼纠纷解决机制,即ADR体系,在纠纷趋向多元化的今天,逐渐发挥出技术优势。与此同时,人民群众对于司法的作用寄予高度期望,为了满足法治社会与和谐社会的建设要求,同时满足社会纠纷管理的秩序建设在司法上的需求,需要重新厘清非诉讼纠纷解决机制的理念,并对司法性非诉讼纠纷解决机制进行理性批判与建构。通过分析ADR构建的合理性基础,并对ADR的程序价值进行定位,最大限度地发挥其应用的效用。
Alternative dispute resolution mechanism, namely ADR has gradually demonstrated the technological superiority under the situation of dispute diversification. Meanwhile, in regards of the demands of society of rule of law and the harmonious society, and the needs of management system of social disputes towards administration of justice, the vital ingredients are trying to clarify the theory of ADR again and implement the rational criticism and construction for juridical ADR. This thesis will relate and analyze the reasonable foundation of construction of ADR from two main aspects, and delimit the procedural values of ADR with the aim of achieving its utility maximization.
Alternative dispute resolution mechanism, namely ADR has gradually demonstrated the technological superiority under the situation of dispute diversification. Meanwhile, in regards of the demands of society of rule of law and the harmonious society, and the needs of management system of social disputes towards administration of justice, the vital ingredients are trying to clarify the theory of ADR again and implement the rational criticism and construction for juridical ADR. This thesis will relate and analyze the reasonable foundation of construction of ADR from two main aspects, and delimit the procedural values of ADR with the aim of achieving its utility maximization.
引文
[1]ABEL R L.The Contradictions of Informal Justice[J].The Politics of Informal Justice,1982(1):295-298.
[2]鲁道夫·冯·耶林.为权利而斗争[M].胡宝海,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2004:25.
[3]刘哲玮.我国民事纠纷解决模型的反思与重构[J].北大法律评论,2012(13):4-30.
[4]苏力.送法下乡[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2011,144-145.
[5]范愉.非诉讼程序(ADR)教程[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2012.
[6]符望.从“接近正义”到“司法为民”[J].法治论丛,2005(2):20-25.
[7]苏力.法治及其本土资源[M].修订版.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004
[8]李莉.法经济学与纠纷解决[J].河北法学,2006(7):115-120.
[9]杨艺红.英国民事司法改革进程中的ADR—兼论对构建我国多元化纠纷解决机制的启示[J].重庆师范大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2007(5):96-101.
[10]李瑜青,夏伟.多元化纠纷解决机制的价值及其路径思考——兼驳机制的运行与法制社会建设相驳论[J].学术界,2016(9):113-122.
[11]李静一.司法附设ADR制度的当代诠释[J].河北学刊,2015(9):152-157.
(1)《最高人民法院关于人民法院进一步深化多元化纠纷解决机制改革的意见》.(2016-06-28)
(2)数据来源:中华人民共和国最高人民法(2016-06-20)http://www.court.gov.cn/fabu-gengduo-21.html.
(3)布迪厄三重警觉的提醒:保持经验主义的思想态度,对一种方法论要抱有方法论上的警惕,从“绝对的方法论”和“绝对的逻辑”中把认识论解放出来。
[2]鲁道夫·冯·耶林.为权利而斗争[M].胡宝海,译.北京:中国法制出版社,2004:25.
[3]刘哲玮.我国民事纠纷解决模型的反思与重构[J].北大法律评论,2012(13):4-30.
[4]苏力.送法下乡[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2011,144-145.
[5]范愉.非诉讼程序(ADR)教程[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2012.
[6]符望.从“接近正义”到“司法为民”[J].法治论丛,2005(2):20-25.
[7]苏力.法治及其本土资源[M].修订版.北京:中国政法大学出版社,2004
[8]李莉.法经济学与纠纷解决[J].河北法学,2006(7):115-120.
[9]杨艺红.英国民事司法改革进程中的ADR—兼论对构建我国多元化纠纷解决机制的启示[J].重庆师范大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2007(5):96-101.
[10]李瑜青,夏伟.多元化纠纷解决机制的价值及其路径思考——兼驳机制的运行与法制社会建设相驳论[J].学术界,2016(9):113-122.
[11]李静一.司法附设ADR制度的当代诠释[J].河北学刊,2015(9):152-157.
(1)《最高人民法院关于人民法院进一步深化多元化纠纷解决机制改革的意见》.(2016-06-28)
(2)数据来源:中华人民共和国最高人民法(2016-06-20)http://www.court.gov.cn/fabu-gengduo-21.html.
(3)布迪厄三重警觉的提醒:保持经验主义的思想态度,对一种方法论要抱有方法论上的警惕,从“绝对的方法论”和“绝对的逻辑”中把认识论解放出来。