“零判决”现象的几点思考

发布时间：2018-05-04 05:05

本文选题：零判决 + 司法能动　；参考：《西南政法大学》2011年硕士论文

【摘要】：“零判决”已经不是一个新鲜的词汇,很多地方的法院都在进行所谓的“零判决”竞赛,以调解撤诉率为100%作为最终的目标。本文主要以“零判决”现象为研究的出发点,对我国目前调解的强势回归进行了一定的思考。第一部分:“零判决”现象概述。我国社会正处在社会转型期,旧的社会规范虽然土崩瓦解,但仍然具有一定的影响力,而新的法治理念、法治制度正在形成过程中,仍不能有效的发挥作用,二者共同构成了目前混合多元的社会规范。转型期社会矛盾尖锐,社会秩序多元化,法治建设与社会发展脱钩,此混合多元社会规范不能满足社会的现实发展需要。调解的强势回归就是为了应对上述困境,作为调解回归理论基础的正是中国无讼传统和国外盛行的司法能动以及推崇的和解浪潮。第二部分:“零判决”现象与司法能动主义。本段落主要从历史的维度出发,对司法能动主义的发展进行了纵向的剖析。首先大陆法系国家是规范出发型诉讼,具有成文法和法律形式主义传统,但是随着社会的发展,逐渐显示出司法过程中法官适法的机械性、僵硬化,并对社会的公平正义的实现造成了障碍,因此,为了应对此问题,逐渐放宽了对法官的拘束,赋予其更大的自由裁量权。在英美法系,可以毫不夸张的说,普通法的形成过程就是法官造法的过程,而到了近代法官的权力逐渐的然伸到立法和司法的领域,并对社会公共政策起到了推动和修正作用。而我国的所谓司法能动主义,是在当时特殊的社会环境下,为了区别于旧社会,以显示自己社会性质,并一切以人民群众为出发点,依靠群众的政治路线而已。第三部分:“零判决”背后掩盖的问题分析。“零判决”现象势必给我国的法治建设进程造成一定的负面影响,并对诉讼法和实体法造成了双重的软化,是诉讼应有的裁判规范和生活规范的功能荡然无存。同时,对我国的调解和国外的和解进行了比较分析,按照棚濑孝雄的关于纠纷解决的分类,分为“根据合意的纠纷解决”和“根据决定的纠纷解决”,我国的调解更接近于后者,而国外的和解基本是前者,真正在理念上和制度上尊重了当事人的意思自治。第四部分:零判决”现象的深思及对我国的相关制度构建的启示。通过以上的分析,我们得出结论,我们刚从职权主义的泥潭中挣扎出来,目标是充分尊重当事人诉讼主体地位和当事人意思自治的当事人主义诉讼模式。我们需要用制度去培养我们的诉讼理念,是在建构规则之治的过程之中,如果此时过度强调调解,势必解构了我们的建构,效果将是负效应。继续完善审前程序,保障当事人的证据收集权利,使诉讼的攻击防御更加明晰化,在此基础上的诉讼上的和解,真正的尊重了当事人的诉讼主体地位和增加了裁判的可接受性。
[Abstract]:"Zero judgment" is no longer a new word. Courts in many places are engaged in so-called "zero judgment" competitions, with a mediation withdrawal rate of 100% as the ultimate goal. Based on the "zero judgment" phenomenon, this paper gives some thoughts on the strong regression of mediation in our country. The first part: an overview of the zero-judgment phenomenon. Our society is in the period of social transformation, although the old social norms collapse, but still have some influence, and the new concept of the rule of law, the rule of law system is forming process, still can not play an effective role. The two constitute the current mixed and pluralistic social norms. In the transitional period, the social contradictions are sharp, the social order is diversified, the construction of rule of law is decoupled from the social development, and the mixed pluralistic social norms can not meet the needs of social development. The strong return of mediation is to deal with the above difficulties. As the theoretical basis of mediation regression, it is the Chinese tradition of non-litigation, the popular judicial activity abroad and the wave of reconciliation respected. The second part: zero judgment and judicial activism. This paragraph mainly from the historical dimension, the development of judicial activism vertical analysis. First of all, the civil law countries have the tradition of statutory law and legal formalism, but with the development of the society, they gradually show the mechanization and rigidity of the judges' suitable law in the judicial process. Therefore, in order to deal with this problem, we gradually relax the restriction on judges and give them more discretion. In Anglo-American law system, it is no exaggeration to say that the forming process of common law is the process of making law by judges, but the power of judges in modern times gradually extends to the field of legislation and judicature, and plays an important role in promoting and revising the social public policy. The so-called judicial activism in our country is in the special social environment at that time, in order to distinguish from the old society in order to show its own social nature, and all take the people as the starting point, rely on the political line of the masses. The third part: the analysis of the hidden problems behind Zero judgment. The phenomenon of "zero judgment" is bound to cause certain negative influence to the construction of our country's rule of law, and has caused double softening to the procedural law and the substantive law. It is the function of the adjudication norm and the standard of life that the lawsuit should have disappeared. At the same time, the author makes a comparative analysis of mediation in China and reconciliation abroad. According to Seto Hsiao-hsiung 's classification of dispute resolution, it is divided into two categories: "according to consensual dispute resolution" and "dispute settlement based on decision". The mediation in our country is closer to the latter, while the reconciliation abroad is basically the former, which respects the autonomy of the parties' will in concept and system. The fourth part: the reflection of the zero-judgment phenomenon and the enlightenment to the construction of the relevant system in our country. Through the above analysis, we come to the conclusion that we have just come out of the quagmire of the doctrine of authority, and the goal is to fully respect the litigant's main position and the litigants' autonomy of litigants. We need to use the system to cultivate our concept of litigation, is in the process of building the rule of governance, if this time too much emphasis on mediation, it is bound to deconstruct our construction, the effect will be negative. Continue to improve the pretrial procedure, ensure the right of the parties to collect evidence, so that the defense against litigation more clear, on the basis of litigation on the basis of reconciliation, the parties really respected the status of the main body of the proceedings and increased the admissibility of the referee.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D926

【引证文献】