美国驻华法院研究

发布时间：2018-06-13 21:35

  本文选题：美国驻华法院 + 领事法庭　； 参考：《华东政法大学》2014年博士论文

【摘要】：法律实证主义与欧洲殖民扩张理念建构了19世纪西方国家主权观念的基本框架,基于“主权观念”与“文明国家”而缔造的近代国际法自然不无例外地将欧洲法乃至西方基督教文明视若应有之意。在此语境下的东方国家,显然是作为被教化者的角色存在的。与传统形式上坚船利炮、昭然若揭的殖民侵略相比,借用“文化帝国主义”甚至“法律帝国主义”对东方国家进行指摘显然更合乎时宜,在此种意义上,近代西方国家对治外法权的申张由此藉发。同时,观念的转变终将体现为制度的变迁。最初以领事法庭为基本样式意图寻求简单意义上国家对侨民的司法保护的惯常之举,虽便捷、直接但绝非良策。脱胎于中世纪的旧习本就悖于时代,遑论法律知识匮乏的领事亦无法胜任良端。英、美两国深谙此道并有所觉察,而改以职业司法机构或取而代之,或厉行监管要务,成效初显。本文即由此阐发,以“美国驻华法院”(1906-1943)为例,试图通过考察这一职业司法机构的设置背景、运作规程、审判实践以及社会效果,对其背后所蕴含西方国家推行“法律帝国主义”的深层次理念作以全方位解读。同时,客观反思美国在华法律人士藉此治外法权实践形式见证并参与中国法制近代化的历史进程,以及近代语境下的国人凭借涉身西方职业司法机构审判进而更为直观体味西方司法模式所带来的冲击,感受西方法治观念洗礼的这一系列过程。除导论、结语外,全文分为四章。导论部分先以备受关注的“会审”、“观审”能否全面表征中国法制近代化中的西方因素这一诘问引出本文的关涉主题——考察西方在华司法机构；通过学术史的梳理指明作为美国在华治外法权特殊形式乃至创举的“美国驻华法院”却鲜为学界所知；诸多法案、案例资料的获取为深度考察透视该法院的司法运作乃至社会效果提供了可能空间。文章开篇即着眼于本文关键词语——“治外法权”的厘定。考察该词的英文原意乃是“治域外法权”,而国人惯常以“治理外国人的法权”的理解显然与之大相径庭。进一步考察,发现该词经由日文向汉语语境的流变中,国人基于特定语境与背景对此产生误读,并进而借题误用,从而将之与“领事裁判权”判若分明。实际上,治外法权显然更能全面表达外人在华司法特权的行使,因为简单意义上的领事裁判权毕竟无法将美国驻华法院这一职业司法机构囊括其中。在厘清两词意涵后,文章具体描述了美国对在华治外法权申张的进程,指出在以双边条约形式确定攫取治外法权后,美国起初仍是仿效西方诸国以设置领事法庭的形式践行其司法权。不过,60年的司法实践使得脱胎于中世纪领事制的领事法庭在司法实践中基于财政预算不足、监狱机构缺失、领事法律知识匮乏及贪腐问题严重等诸多问题,在实际上阻滞了美国在华治外法权的进程。于是,为摆脱前述困境而采“英皇在华高等法院”蓝本最终创建美国驻华法院以更好地践行美国在华治外法权的司法实践。第二章通过对美国驻华法院的制度规定作以解读,引出法律帝国主义的论断。文章先是界明法律帝国主义的理论与隐含,通过领事法庭所审理的3起较为典型案件探明领事在促成法律帝国主义申张方面的捉襟见肘。其中,“威廉姆斯案”与“怀特案”揭露了美国在华领事法庭体系的制度缺陷；“巴克利案”则动摇了领事法庭体系设置的宪法性基础。有鉴于此,作为改良机制存在的美国驻华法院应运而生。创设美国驻华法院的法案对法院管辖权范围作以明确界定,使之具备监管中国域内所有民、刑事案件的绝对管辖权,亦授权其受理领事法庭的上诉案件；在为其法律适用寻求“美国法”、“普通法”等宽泛外延的基础上,赋予其法院规程制定权,为践行司法权提供便利。其后,在法官选任方面的严格把关,使得美国驻华法院5任法官对于法学理论与法律实践皆熟谙把握,更有助于美国法治观念的传播,促成法律帝国主义理念的达成。当然,在与领事法庭、在华美国律师的互动方面,不论法官抑或驻华法院都经历着竞争与融合交织的独特场面。前述诸端,可以确定,如果说领事法庭所解决的仅在于保护美国海外人士的切实利益,或仅仅是美国政府无暇顾及的权宜之计,那么驻华法院的设置无疑具有针对性和目的性,侧重于深层次以西方司法模式重塑域外司法场域。第三章意图深入考察美国驻华法院的案件审判基本状况。从数据分析与实证分析两条路径出发,以罗炳吉所编撰《治外法权案例集》为依托,检视驻华法院的受案对象及案件类型。可以发现,法院除对律师、娼妓与赌徒、无业游民等目标人群作以规范外,还将管辖权扩张至美国属民、美籍华人甚至原告为美国人的案件中；所审判的案件类型则以刑事案件、合同案件以及遗嘱或遗产案件为主,其中有为数不少的中国人作为原告的诉讼案件。通过对案件进行宏观把握,总结美国驻华法院所适用的基本法律准则,包括对于美国基本联邦法典的适用,对于普通法原则的适用与偏离,对于国会所颁行的特别法案(尤其是阿拉斯加地区及哥伦比亚特区法案)的遵从,对于《治外法权救济准则》、法学家著述观点以及公共租界市政条例及中国法的征引等。最后,择选3起较为典型个案,从其审判意见中找寻驻华法院在案件审判中对于法律适用的坚持与恪守,发现案件审判中确立的某些原则、观念偶有创新甚至颇具影响。第四章侧重于审视美国驻华法院的社会效果。先以《申报》作为考察样本,选择法官更迭、巡回审判及典型案件的追踪两条线索,以“局外人”的视角考察国人视野下的美国驻华法院是何般样态。再结合东吴大学法学院《法学季刊》对美国驻华法院案例判决的摘录,可以发现,通过报刊、舆论的推介,原本对于美国式西方司法模式及程序一无所知的国人开始逐渐了解,甚至自觉委身于此种司法模式之下,适用西方权利保护模式维护切身利益；同时,通过对以罗炳吉为首的美国法律职业群体对东吴法学院的帮持、对英美法学教育的推广等方面进行考察,进而指明,前述活动虽立足于实现美国法治观念的推广以及美国法律帝国主义的宏大愿景,但毕竟在客观上推进了中国近代法学教育的发展,见证并在一定程度上参与了中国近代法制化的历程。结语部分,在回溯全文基础上阐明美国驻华法院的创设表达了法律帝国主义观念在中国演进进程；其次,对以美国驻华法院为代表的西方国家在华治外法权重新审视,指出近代意义上的国际法实际上为治外法权提供了理论依托。
[Abstract]:The concept of legal positivism and European colonial expansion constructed the basic framework of the sovereignty concept of western countries in the nineteenth Century. The modern international law created by "the concept of sovereignty" and "civilized state" naturally regarded European law and the Western Christian civilization as it deserved. Compared with the traditional form of the cannon and the colonialist invasion, it is more appropriate to borrow the "cultural imperialism" and even the "legal imperialism" to the eastern countries. In this sense, the modern western countries' extension of the extraterritorial power of the western countries. In the end, change will be reflected in the change of the system. Initially taking the consular tribunal as the basic style to seek the common practice of the state's judicial protection of the nationals in a simple sense, it is convenient, direct but not a good strategy. The old habit of being born in the Middle Ages is contrary to the times, and the consul lack of legal knowledge is not competent. This article is an example of "American Chinese court in China" (1906-1943), trying to investigate the setting background, operation rules, trial practice and social effects of this professional judicial institution, and the western countries behind it. The deep level of the concept of "legal imperialism" is carried out in a full range of interpretation. At the same time, it is an objective reflection on the historical process of witnessing and participating in the modernized Chinese legal system in the form of extraterritorial jurisdictions in the United States in China, as well as in the modern context with the western professional judiciary, which is more intuitive and more intuitive to the West. In addition to the introduction and the conclusion, the full text is divided into four chapters. In addition to the introduction and conclusion, the full text is divided into four chapters. The introduction part first focuses on the "meeting trial", and the "view trial" can fully characterize the western factors in the modernization of Chinese legal system. The Chinese judicial institution, through a combing of academic history, indicates that the United States' special form of extraterritorial jurisdiction in the United States and even the creation of the "American court of China" is rarely known by the academic community; the acquisition of a number of bills and case data provides a possible space for the in-depth examination of the judicial operation and social effects of the court. The original meaning of "extraterritorial legal right" is the original meaning of the word "governing extraterritorial jurisdiction", and the understanding of "governing the legal rights of foreigners" is obviously different from that of the Chinese. Further investigation has been made to find that the word is produced in the context and background of the Chinese language in the context of the Chinese language. In fact, the extraterritorial jurisdiction is obviously more able to fully express the exercise of the judicial privileges of the foreign people in China, because in the simple sense, the consular jurisdiction in the simple sense can not include the United States Court in China as a professional law institution. After clarifying the meaning of the two words, the article has been clarified. The process of the extraterritorial legal rights of the United States in China was described in detail, and it was pointed out that after the determination of extraterritorial power in the form of bilateral treaties, the United States was at first imitating the western countries to practice its judicial power in the form of a consular court. However, 60 years of judicial practice made the consular tribunal of the consular system in the Middle Ages in the judicial practice. The lack of the financial budget, the lack of prison institutions, the lack of consular legal knowledge and the serious corruption problems have actually blocked the process of the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the United States in China. So, to get rid of the predicament, the blue book of "the emperor in China High Court" was created to better practice the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the United States in China. The second chapter, through the interpretation of the institutional provisions of the American court in China, leads to the conclusion of the legal imperialism. The article first defines the theory and implication of the legal imperialism, and through the 3 more typical cases heard by the consular court, it is clear that the consul has made a wide gap in the promotion of the legal imperialism. " The Williams case and the White case reveal the institutional defects of the American consular court system in the United States; the "Barkley case" has shaken the constitutional basis for the establishment of the consular court system. In order to clearly define the absolute jurisdiction of all people in the Chinese domain and the absolute jurisdiction of the criminal cases, it also authorizes the appeals case to be accepted by the consular court; on the basis of the application of the "United States law" and "common law" to its legal application, the jurisdiction of the court is granted and the judicial power is facilitated. After that, the judge is in the judge. The strict check on the election has made the 5 judges of the American court in China familiar with the theory of law and the practice of law. It is more conducive to the spread of the concept of the rule of law in the United States and the achievement of the idea of the legal imperialism. Of course, in the interaction with the consular court and the American lawyers in China, the judges or the courts in China have experienced competition. It is certain that if the consular tribunal resolved only to protect the practical interests of the American overseas people, or only the expedient measures that the American government had no time to consider, the establishment of the court in China was undoubtedly pertinent and objective, focusing on the remolding of the western judicial model. The third chapter is intended to examine the basic situation of the case trial of the American court in China. Based on the two paths of data analysis and empirical analysis, based on Luo Bingji's compilation of the case set of extraterritorial jurisdictions, it examines the subject and type of cases of the court in China. It can be found that the court has no business except for lawyers, prostitutes and gamblers. The target group, such as the visitors, also expands the jurisdiction to the American people, the American Chinese and even the plaintiff in the case of the American; the types of the cases are mainly criminal cases, contract cases and will or legacy cases, among which many Chinese are the plaintiffs' litigation cases. To sum up, summarize the basic legal norms applicable to the American court of China, including the application of the Basic Federal Code of the United States, the application and deviation of the common law principles, the compliance of the special bills issued by the Congress (especially the Alaska region and the Columbia Special Administrative Region act), the law of extraterritorial legal rights relief, the jurists In the end, 3 typical cases were selected and selected from the trial opinions to find out the adherence and abiding by the court in the trial of China in the trial of the case, and find some principles established in the trial of the case, and the concept even has the innovation or even the influence. The fourth chapter focuses on the examination. The social effect of the American court in China first takes "Declaration >" as an inspection sample, and chooses two clues as judge change, circuit trial and typical case tracking. It can be found that, through the press and the introduction of public opinion, people who had no knowledge of the American western judicial model and procedure began to understand gradually, and even consciously committed themselves to the protection of Western rights under this kind of judicial mode. At the same time, the American legal profession, headed by Luo Bingji, was adopted. On the basis of the promotion of the concept of the rule of law in the United States and the grand vision of American legal imperialism, the preceding activities, after all, have promoted the development of the modern Chinese law education, and have witnessed and participated in a certain extent. In the concluding part, on the basis of the full text, the author clarifies the creation and expression of the concept of legal imperialism in China's evolution in China. Secondly, it reexamines the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the western countries represented by the American courts in China, and points out that the international law in the modern sense is actually the extraterritorial power. It provides a theoretical basis.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D929
，

本文编号：2015504