当代中国语境下能动司法的实践与路径选择
发布时间：2018-11-23 08:39
【摘要】：我国“能动司法”这一概念是最高人民法院院长王胜俊于2009年提出的,其产生有着应对国际金融危机、回应转型期社会司法需求、对司法改革进行调整等原因和背景。由于我国的能动司法的概念主要体现在决策者的有关讲话、行动以及各级法院的实践之中,缺乏系统的理论论述,因此,本文从比较的角度,以分析其与司法能动主义、司法克制主义、法条主义等概念的区别出发,探究其本质内涵。与此同时,通过观察近年来能动司法在全国各地的实践,可以看出其推行确实取得了一定的成效。但由于缺少完善的制度规范,导致有些法院忽视司法运行的规律、过多地扩展法院职能、忽视审判执行的中心工作,致使司法出现盲动、乱动。文章通过总结反思能动司法中存在的问题,提出如何消解其负面影响,使其在现代法治的轨道上运行的应对之策。即：中国需要能动司法,但不能缺少以司法克制为前提的常规司法；中国司法需要追求社会效果,但更应强调规则的至上性；中国司法应当在维护司法独立、强调程序公正、实现司法职业化的前提下,去倡导案结事了、便民诉讼、司法服务的能动方针。
[Abstract]:The concept of "active justice" in China was put forward by President Wang Shengjun of the Supreme people's Court in 2009. It has the causes and background of dealing with the international financial crisis, responding to the needs of social justice in the transitional period, and adjusting the judicial reform. Since the concept of active justice in our country is mainly reflected in the relevant speeches, actions and the practice of courts at all levels, there is a lack of systematic theoretical exposition. Therefore, this paper analyzes its relationship with judicial activism from a comparative point of view. Starting from the differences between the concepts of judicial restraint and legalism, this paper explores its essential connotation. At the same time, by observing the practice of active judicature in recent years, we can see that it has achieved certain results. However, due to the lack of perfect system and norms, some courts ignore the law of judicial operation, expand the functions of the court too much, ignore the central work of trial execution, and cause the judiciary to move blindly and irregularly. By summing up the existing problems in active justice, this paper puts forward some countermeasures to eliminate its negative influence and make it run on the track of modern rule of law. That is to say, China needs active judicature, but it cannot lack the conventional judicature with judicial restraint as its premise, Chinese judicature needs to pursue social effect, but it should emphasize the supremacy of rules. On the premise of safeguarding judicial independence, emphasizing procedural justice and realizing judicial professionalization, Chinese judicature should advocate the active policy of case closure, convenient litigation and judicial service.
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D926
本文编号：2350933
[Abstract]:The concept of "active justice" in China was put forward by President Wang Shengjun of the Supreme people's Court in 2009. It has the causes and background of dealing with the international financial crisis, responding to the needs of social justice in the transitional period, and adjusting the judicial reform. Since the concept of active justice in our country is mainly reflected in the relevant speeches, actions and the practice of courts at all levels, there is a lack of systematic theoretical exposition. Therefore, this paper analyzes its relationship with judicial activism from a comparative point of view. Starting from the differences between the concepts of judicial restraint and legalism, this paper explores its essential connotation. At the same time, by observing the practice of active judicature in recent years, we can see that it has achieved certain results. However, due to the lack of perfect system and norms, some courts ignore the law of judicial operation, expand the functions of the court too much, ignore the central work of trial execution, and cause the judiciary to move blindly and irregularly. By summing up the existing problems in active justice, this paper puts forward some countermeasures to eliminate its negative influence and make it run on the track of modern rule of law. That is to say, China needs active judicature, but it cannot lack the conventional judicature with judicial restraint as its premise, Chinese judicature needs to pursue social effect, but it should emphasize the supremacy of rules. On the premise of safeguarding judicial independence, emphasizing procedural justice and realizing judicial professionalization, Chinese judicature should advocate the active policy of case closure, convenient litigation and judicial service.
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D926
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 李辉;;对能动司法实践的反思——从陇县“能动主义八四司法模式”谈起[J];东岳论丛;2009年11期
2 张伟强;;审判的法律效果与社会效果——法官应该追求什么[J];法律方法;2009年00期
3 李辉;;司法能动主义与司法克制主义的比较分析[J];法律方法;2009年00期
4 庞凌;法院如何寻求司法能动主义与克制主义的平衡[J];法律适用;2004年01期
5 范愉;;诉前调解与法院的社会责任 从司法社会化到司法能动主义[J];法律适用;2007年11期
6 公丕祥;;坚持司法能动 依法服务大局 对江苏法院金融危机司法应对工作的初步总结与思考[J];法律适用;2009年11期
7 罗东川;丁广宇;;论能动司法应处理好的几个关系[J];法律适用;2010年10期
8 苏力;;关于能动司法[J];法律适用;2010年Z1期
9 罗东川;丁广宇;;我国能动司法的理论与实践评述[J];法律适用;2010年Z1期
10 ;能动司法制度构建初探[J];法律适用;2010年Z1期
，本文编号：2350933
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/gongjianfalunwen/2350933.html
