陪审员参与刑事审判的思考

发布时间：2018-04-11 08:41

本文选题：刑事审判 + 陪审制度　；参考：《吉林大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：公民通过陪审制度参与司法审判，是公民共享国家公权力与在司法领域实现民主的最直接的途径之一。研究和完善陪审制度可以为我国司法制度的改革提供审判、诉讼等方面的依据，并促使陪审制度保障更广泛地公民更确实地参与司法。本文通过四个部分来探讨和论证公民通过陪审制度参与司法审判的必要性、可操作性和有效性。在第一部分中，本文从公民参与刑事审判的两个主要的理论基础来论证其必要性。首先是公民通过陪审制度参与司法审判的直接来源，即古老的同类人审判的司法理念。同类人审判是公民享有的审判自己的权利在法律权力面前的妥协与让贤，也就是说，审判公民的权利之初属于公民自身，但是法律强有力的权力对其进行禁止，从而在法律权力与公民权利的博弈与磨合中产生了同类人审判。同类人审判即要求审判公民时，必须有被审判公民的同类者担任审判者的一部分，以此在审判之外的领域中，，法律权力和公民权利再次产生冲突和摩擦时，同类人的审判可以对公民的权利进行保护，避免公民权利被过于强大的法律权力恣意践踏。以此，同类人审判理念下公民为维护自身的权利，要求有公民的同类人公民参与司法审判。其次，司法民主理念督使公民参与司法审判。尤其在我国是人民民主专政的社会主义国家性质的前提下，公民直接参与司法审判，是司法领域中实现民主的最直接体现。此外，公民参与刑事审判可以与审判员优势互补。司法审判应当积极地向审判公正的目标靠拢，但是任何审判者有自身固有的局限性，以此在公民作为陪审员参与司法审判可以对审判员独自担任审判者的局限性进行弥补，两者的社会属性决定了共任审判者可以在审判中优势互补，督使司法审判的公正。虽然在必然性的发展下，我国设立了公民通过陪审制度参与司法审判这一途径，但是这一途径的发展现状不容乐观。本文在第二部分主要讲诉了两个方面的陪审制度发展的现状，包括陪审员的选任不规范导致公民参审的目的不能实现、陪审员的参审权被司法机关忽视。在第二部分的下文中论述了两个导致陪审制度现状的主要原由，包括陪审员参审权的立法性质不够明晰，即陪审员的参与审判权是一种“权利”、陪审员对参审的目的不能正确认识。其中，陪审员的参与审判权是一种“权利”是现状产生的最关键原因，直接致使公民作为陪审员在审判中的无能为力，使陪审制度空置，公民参与司法审判的目的空落，对公民权利的保护与司法民主，乃至国家的民主造成恶劣的损害。陪审制度应当向应然状态发展靠拢，也就是，陪审制度下的陪审员参审权必然要回归于于权力，成为名符其实的司法权，因此本文在第三部分研究了应然状态下的几个主要方面对陪审员的参审权的要求，以期公民作为陪审员参审作出审判时有依据而不盲从。其中主要包括刑罚功能、刑事诉讼法的目的和任务、刑事审判模式三个方面对陪审员作为审判者在进行司法审判时的具体要求。在本文的第四部分，对公民作为陪审员参与司法审判提出了几点建议，包括陪审制度下陪审员的参与审判权应当回归于其应有之实，应当通过基本法律的形式将陪审员的参审权明确地规定为一项司法权，通过法律委托陪审员在司法领域中行使的一项国家公权力。同时建议司法中优化陪审员的选任标准，并提出对陪审员的信息进行有序地管理的模式，即建立陪审员候选信息数据库，以便于对陪审员的报名登记、选择、排除等及时地操作。对于是否适用该种数据库对陪审员的信息进行管理，陪审员的任期都应当予以取缔，其有悖于公民通过陪审制度参与司法中的广泛性要求，在陪审制度中产生连锁地不良影响，阻滞陪审制度的发展，必须取消对陪审员的任期规定。公民通过陪审制度参与司法审判需要法律的明文保障、公民的积极争取与司法系统的有效实施三个主要方面的同步。以此国家对陪审制度有义务给予法律上的明确规定及司法系统对陪审制度行之有效的管理与操作。本文从陪审员参与司法审判的两个主要理论基础出发，研究了公民通过陪审制度参与司法审判的必要性，并从我国陪审制度实施的实然状态与应然状态的差距对比分析，提出了产生实然现状的原因，与陪审制度发展的建议，以期陪审员参与司法审判的发展符合其应有意义。
[Abstract]:Citizens to participate in the judicial trial by jury system, citizens share national power to achieve one of the most direct way to democracy and in the judicial field. The research and improvement of the jury system can provide a trial for the reform of China's judicial system, litigation and other aspects of the basis, and urges the jury system guarantee citizens to be a more widely in court. This paper discusses the necessity through four parts and prove the citizen to participate in the judicial trial by jury system, operability and effectiveness.
In the first part, this paper demonstrates its necessity from the two main theoretical basis of citizen participation in the criminal trial. The first is the direct source of citizens to participate in the judicial trial by jury system, namely the ancient people of the judicial philosophy. The same people that citizens enjoy the trial judge in his own right in front of the legal authority compromise and volume, that is to say, at the beginning of the trial of civil rights belongs to the citizens of their own, but the law prohibits the strong power, which run in the game and the legal power and civil rights in the same trial. Same trial trial of citizens, there must be a citizen of the same part of the trial as a judge, which in addition to the trial in the field of law, power and civil rights again conflicts and frictions, peers can judge the civil rights protection, To avoid civil rights by legal power is too strong. The wanton trample to citizens, the concept of congener trial to safeguard their rights, require citizens similar citizens to participate in the judicial trial. Secondly, judicial democracy and enable citizens to participate in the judicial trial. Especially in our country is the premise of socialist nature of the country under the people's democratic dictatorship citizens, directly participate in the administration of justice, is the most direct embodiment of the realization of democracy in the judicial field. In addition, the citizen participation in the criminal trial can complement and judge. Justice should actively to justice goals closer, but any judge has inherent limitations, make up for the limitations of the citizens in the jury who can participate in the administration of justice of judges alone as the judge, the social attribute determines any judge can complementary advantages in the trial, and The justice of the judicial trial.
Although in the inevitability of development, China has established the jury system through the citizens to participate in the judicial trial this way, but the current situation of the development of this approach is not optimistic. In the second part of this paper mainly tells the status of the two aspects of the development of the jury system, including jurors elected not to not regulate lead citizen participation the implementation of the jury trial right by the judicial authorities ignored. In the second part of the text discusses two main reasons leading to the jury system of legislation, including the nature of jury trial right is not clear, the jury and trial right is a "right", a correct understanding of the jury the purpose of the trial cannot. The jury trial participation right is a "right" is the key reason behind the direct cause of citizens as jurors in the trial of the jury system vacancy, incapable of action, the public The goal of the people to participate in the judicial trial is empty, and the protection of civil rights and the democracy of the judiciary and the democracy of the country are badly damaged.
The jury system shall apply to the state development approach, namely, the jury system of the jury trial right must return to power, become worthy of the judicial power, so in the third part of this paper studies several main aspects should be state of the jury trial right, in order to citizens as a juror the assessor made the trial basis and not blind obedience. Including the penalty function, purpose and task of the criminal procedure law, the three aspects of the criminal trial mode to the jury as a judge in the judicial judgment of the specific requirements.
In the fourth part, the citizen as a juror in the judicial trial and puts forward some suggestions, including the jury jury system under the jurisdiction of participation should return to its proper reality, should be through the basic legal form of jury trial rights provisions for a jurisdiction by law, entrust the jury in the judicial field exercising a public power of the state. At the same time, the suggestion of optimizing the criteria for selection of jurors, and put forward to the jury information orderly management mode, namely the establishment of the jury candidate information database, to facilitate the jury selection, registration, etc. in a timely manner to exclude operations. Whether the database of jury management, the jury office should be banned, contrary to its citizens through the jury system involved in a wide range of judicial requirements in the jury system In the adverse effects of chain, block the development of the jury system, the jury must cancel the tenure of the jury system. By citizens participate in the administration of justice requires legal protection of citizens to actively seek the plaintext, synchronization and effective implementation of the judicial system of the three main aspects of the management and operation of this country. The jury system has an obligation to make clear on the legal provisions and judicial system is effective for the jury system.
The two main theoretical basis of this article from the jurors to participate in the judicial trial of the necessity of citizen participation in the judicial trial by jury system, comparative analysis of the gap between reality and ideality and the implementation of the jury system in our country, put forward the status quo reasons, and suggestions for the development of the jury system, in accordance with the due to significance of the development of jurors to participate in the judicial trial.

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D926.2

【相似文献】