最高人民法院公信力问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-22 20:48

本文选题：最高人民法院 + 司法　；参考：《南京大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：最高人民法院对外参与我国的政治生活,对内全面领导司法系统的行政和审判工作,是我国重要的国家机构。然而,最高人民法院的公信力却不处于一个相对较高的地位,这从全国人民代表大会上最高人民法院工作报告的审议通过率,以及最高人民法院领导下的司法系统公信力状况等方面都有所体现。在对最高人民法院公信力偏低的原因进行分析中,独立性、地位、专业化和司法改革等四个要素占有重要地位,为具体分析设定了重点。围绕这四个因素,分析主要包括两个具体的维度,一是通过分析历史上我国的最高司法机构发展状况,寻找最高人民法院公信力问题的本源。在历史上,我国最高司法机构主要分为四个发展阶段,即中华苏维埃共和国时期的最高法院时期,抗日战争时期的陕甘宁等边区高等法院时期,解放战争时期的解放区最高司法机构时期和新中国建立之后的最高人民法院时期。通过对历史事件和法院组织结构的梳理,展现相关问题。二是分析当今最高人民法院的相关结构和问题,揭示公信力缺失的现实原因,主要有独立性显著不足,地位仍然边缘,专业化严重不足和司法改革方向迷失等四方面问题。除了对我国最高人民法院的纵向研究之外,与别国最高司法机构的横向比较研究不但能够从另一个方面体现出问题的所在,更能为进一步解决方案的提出提供一些借鉴思路。英国的最高司法机构上议院在君主立宪的政治体制下,具备更多的象征性意义,通过与政治的严格划分和机构、职能的严重限缩来对自身实行严格的控制,保证其较为纯正的司法性和严谨性；美国最高法院在三权分立的国家政治结构下,通过违宪审查权力的获取和对政治的积极参与,逐步在三权分立中获得了稳定的地位；相比较而言,我国最高人民法院在性质和组织、最高司法机构的定位以及相关职能等方面体现出了一种更加“折衷”的意味,适合以英美两国作为参照系进行比较分析。在对我国最高人民法院公信力问题详细分析的基础上,最高人民法院可以通过一些有针对性的对策,主要包括发挥主动性,寻找合适的突破口,实行严格的自我控制,独立性的不懈努力和策略性的司法改革,从不同角度来切实提高最高人民法院的其司法公信力。
[Abstract]:The Supreme people's Court participates in the political life of our country and leads the administration and trial of the judicial system in an all-round way, which is an important national organization in our country. However, the credibility of the Supreme people's Court is not in a relatively high position. This is due to the passing rate of deliberation on the work report of the Supreme people's Court at the National people's Congress. And the Supreme people's Court under the leadership of the judicial system credibility and other aspects are reflected. In the analysis of the reasons for the low credibility of the Supreme people's Court, the independence, status, specialization and judicial reform occupy an important position, which sets the key point for the concrete analysis. Around these four factors, the analysis mainly includes two specific dimensions. The first is to find the origin of the credibility of the Supreme people's Court through the analysis of the development of the highest judicial institutions in the history of our country. Historically, the highest judicial institutions in China were divided into four stages of development, namely, the Supreme Court period in the period of the Soviet Republic of China, the period of the High Court of the Border region in the period of the War of Resistance against Japan, and the period of the High Court of the Border region. The period of the Supreme Judicial Organization in liberated areas during the War of Liberation and the period of Supreme people's Court after the founding of New China. Through the historical events and the organizational structure of the court comb, show the relevant issues. The second is to analyze the relevant structure and problems of the Supreme people's Court and to reveal the practical reasons for the lack of credibility, including the obvious lack of independence, the still marginal status, the serious shortage of specialization and the loss of the direction of judicial reform. In addition to the vertical study of the Supreme people's Court of China, the horizontal comparative study with the highest judicial institutions of other countries can not only reflect the problem from another aspect, but also provide some useful ideas for further solutions. Britain's highest judicial body, the House of Lords, has more symbolic significance under the constitutional monarchy, exercising strict control over itself through strict division of politics and institutions, and severe curtailment of its functions. Under the national political structure of the separation of powers, the Supreme Court of the United States has gradually gained a stable position in the separation of powers through the acquisition of the power of unconstitutional review and the active participation in politics. Comparatively speaking, the nature and organization of the Supreme people's Court of China, the orientation of the supreme judicial institution and the related functions embody a more "compromise" meaning, which is suitable for comparative analysis between the United States and the United States. On the basis of a detailed analysis of the credibility of the Supreme people's Court in China, the Supreme people's Court can adopt some targeted countermeasures, mainly including giving play to initiative, finding suitable breakthroughs, and exercising strict self-control. The unremitting efforts of independence and the strategic judicial reform improve the judicial credibility of the Supreme people's Court from different angles.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D926.21

【相似文献】