当代中国司法民主问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-01 00:37

本文选题：司法　切入点：民主　出处：《吉林大学》2012年博士论文

【摘要】：长期以来，中国的司法体制改革始终面临司法职业化与司法民主化两种路径取向的对峙。既有的司法民主问题研究仅仅关注到纷争的表相，因此未能形成真正的理论交锋。其实，这场纷争背后暗涵的真正理论挑战在于：西方化模式与本土化经验的磨擦、法律思维与道德（伦理）思维的较量、程序合理性与实质合理性的冲突、个案正义优先和普遍正义优先的争执，而这些对峙最终又都可以在个人权利与社会利益的对立中找到根源。因此，探寻化解这些冲突与分歧的现实而有效的路径，才是当代中国司法民主问题研究的真问题。中外学者对于司法民主问题的研究，大致形成了三种理论进路：主体民主进路、立宪民主进路以及程序民主进路。但是，由于对“民主”这一核心概念存在误解和分歧，这三种进路都无法建构起具有说服力且能真正有效化解纷争的“司法民主”理念。因此，通过对现代民主理论之协商转向的分析，并运用语义分析的方法澄清了“民主”与“司法”的现代内涵之后，本论文尝试开辟一种协商民主的研究进路对司法民主进行理念重构。基于这一协商民主的理论进路，，不仅揭示了“民主”与“司法”之间的内源性关系及理论关联，更进一步揭示了现代“司法民主”的理论内涵，从而指出，确保司法资源在社会中的平等、合理分配、建立司法理念的“公共性”品性以及实现司法独立与司法责任的并重，既是现代司法民主理念的应有之义，更是衡量司法是否具有民主性以及民主性程度高低的重要指标。然而，这一经过重构的司法民主理念是否具有说服力呢？在这一追问的引领下，我们必须将视野从理论与概念转向历史和现实。经历长期的理论积淀与经验试错，西方的司法民主理论与实践表明：在面对现实困境与理论挑战时，正是基于民主理论的协商转向完成了司法民主理念的转型，才进一步推进了司法民主运行机制的制度创新与完善。通过对中国司法民主化历程的回顾与反思，我们也发现，中国的司法民主化改革之所以举步维艰，正是因为在一种被误读的民主观影响下，形成了一种被错误理解的司法民主理念，进而导致司法民主运行机制的运转不良。因此，以协商民主语境中的司法民主理念为指导，在对中西方历史与现实的关照和反思基础上，分析了当代中国司法民主的重要制度保障，主要应包括以下五个方面：即司法独立制度的法律化与制度化；司法主体机制从“供给者”向“需求者”的视角转换；司法程序运行机制从“对抗式”向“合作式”的重心转换；司法问责与监督机制的规范化建设；司法附生机制从“一元”到“多元”的建立等等。
[Abstract]:For a long time, the reform of the judicial system Chinese always facing judicial occupation and judicial democracy two orientation confrontation. The existing problems of judicial democracy only concerned about the dispute Biaoxiang, therefore failed to form a theory of real confrontation. In fact, the real challenge of the theory behind the dispute culvert is: friction Western Modes the experience and localization, legal thinking and morality (Ethics) thinking of the contest, procedural rationality and the substantive rationality of the conflict, individual justice priority and universal justice priority dispute, but the confrontation eventually has its roots in the opposition of individual rights and social interests. Therefore, seeking to resolve these conflicts and differences of reality the effective path is really the problem of judicial democracy China contemporary issues.
Study on the issue of judicial democracy in China and foreign countries has formed approximately three theoretical approaches: the main route of democracy, constitutional democracy approach and procedure democracy approach. However, due to the existence of misunderstandings and disagreements on "democracy" of the core concept, the three approaches are unable to construct a persuasive and can really effectively resolve disputes "the concept of" judicial democracy. Therefore, analysis of steering through consultation on the modern democratic theory, modern connotation and clarification of "democracy" and "justice" using the method of semantic analysis, this thesis tries to open up a research approach of deliberative democracy concept reconstruction of judicial democracy.
This approach is based on the theory of deliberative democracy, not only reveals the intrinsic relations and relations between democracy "and" justice ", further reveals the modern" judicial democracy "theory, and thus points out that to ensure judicial equality of resources in society, rational distribution, to establish the judicial idea of" public "the character and the realization of judicial independence and responsibility of both, righteousness is the modern judicial idea of democracy, it is an important indicator to measure whether judicial democratic and democratic level.
However, the concept of judicial democracy after reconstruction are convincing? This question in the lead, we must view from the theory and concepts to history and reality. Through the theory and experience of long-term accumulation of trial and error, show that the theory and practice of Western Judicial Democracy: in the face of difficulties and challenges the theory. It is the theory of democracy consultation based on the turn completed the transformation of judicial democracy, to further promote the system innovation and improve the operating mechanism of judicial democracy. Through the review and Reflection on China judicial democratization process, we also found that the judicial democratization reform China is difficult, it is because the concept of democracy is misreading effect in a form, a wrong understanding of the concept of judicial democracy, judicial democracy and lead to mechanism of dysfunction.
Therefore, the deliberative democracy in the context of the idea of judicial democracy as a guide, in the western history and reality care and Reflection on the basis of analysis of the important system China judicial democracy of contemporary security, mainly includes the following five aspects: legal and institutional system of judicial independence; judicial subject conversion mechanism from the "supply" to "demand" from the perspective of judicial procedure; operation mechanism of transformation from "confrontation" to "focus of cooperation"; judicial accountability and supervision mechanism of the standard question of construction; the judicial mechanism from the "one yuan" attached to "pluralism" and so on.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D926

【引证文献】