人民陪审团与法官的制度衔接与规则协调——以审判格式化与人格化的关系为视角

人民陪审团属于外挂式陪审模式,其与专业法官的关系,实际上是司法专业化审判与民众社会化审判关系在程序上的反映。人民陪审团可以有效地改变审判格式化的局面,使案件的审判具有个体人格化的特性。在具体的制度建构中,应当使具体规则与人民陪审团的价值目标相统一,以免民众审判与人民陪审团沦为司法权与法官的附庸。     

美国陪审团制度及其特点

美国的陪审团制度体现在其宪法修正案当中，无论民事还是刑事案件，原被告都可以提出陪审团审判的要求。陪审团分大陪审团和小陪审团，大陪审团只适用于刑事案件，其主要职责和权利是决定是否起诉。小陪审团通常由12人组成，通过对案件事实的认定，决定嫌疑人是否有罪。本文所提到的陪审团，一般是指小陪审团。     

陪审团在衰退吗——当代英美陪审团的发展趋势解读

陪审团审判在民事案件和刑事案件中的使用都呈逐渐减少之趋势,并且批评陪审团审判制度的声音也越来越多。但是一些原来已经废除陪审团审判的国家却正在恢复或试图恢复这一制度。陪审团审判的生命力仍然旺盛,因为它仍然在保障自由、制约国家权力方面发挥着不可替代的作用。     

论美国陪审制度的发展与走向

陪审团审判在民事案件和刑事案件中的使用都呈逐渐减少之趋势,并且批评陪审团审判制度的声音也越来越多。但是一些原来已经废除陪审团审判的国家却正在恢复或试图恢复这一制度。陪审团审判的生命力仍然旺盛,因为它仍然在保障自由、制约国家权力方面发挥着不可替代的作用。     

当前司法体制改革探讨性研究

我国司法体制需要进行一系列的改革。尤其是在审判体制、审判方式、检察制度、监督体制、司法机关的效率与公平以及司法经费的管理制度等方面均存在一定的问题。在加快依法治国的进程中，必须要对其进行改进与完善，逐步建立陪审团制度、加强当事人主义诉讼模式、检察机关的合理定位、重视制定《监督法》、促进司法公正、提高司法效率，建立一个高效运行的司法系统，改革经费管理制度。     

浅议美国陪审团制度——兼论对我国陪审制度的完善

陪审制度是审判机关吸收法官以外的社会公众代表参与案件审判的制度。文章以美国的陪审团制度为视角进行分析,并结合我国人民陪审员制的实施现状,谈谈美国陪审团制度对完善我国人民陪审员制度的启示。     

陪审团制度：老化的生产线——陪审团制度在美国刑事诉讼中的现状

陪审团制度由英国殖民者带进北美大陆，美国独立后把这一制度继承下来，联邦宪法第六修正案将“得到陪审团公正的审判”确立为刑事被告的一项基本诉讼权利。既然是被告的权利，被告当然可以放弃。于是联邦最高法院规定：被告可以放弃陪审团审判而主动认罪，但必须得到联邦法院和美国检察官的同意。可在很多州，被告放弃陪审团审判只需得到法院的同意并不需要州检察官的同意。     

以西方法学思潮视角分析媒体审判现象

媒体审判在宣传法制教育、推动司法审判公开透明、实施媒体监督、倡导公平正义价值理念方面起着巨大的作用,但其绑架公众舆论介入司法审判的风险性也不容忽视。本文结合美国陪审团制度,对我国的媒体审判现象提出改善建议。     

美国大陪审团与检察官的公诉权

在西方诉讼制度中,陪审制有大、小陪审团之分。一般来说,行使起诉职能的是大陪审团,行使审判职能的是小陪审团。在美国,公诉权由检察官和大陪审团分别行使。刑事起诉有两种主要形式:大陪审团提出的起诉书和检察官提出的公诉书。有些刑事案件的起诉,由检察院直接决定和提起;而有些案件,特别是重罪案件,提起公诉并交付审判必须由大陪审团决定。在程序上由检察官将拟就的起诉书草案和有关材料提交给有管辖权的法院组织的大陪审团进行审查,以决定是否交付审判。一、美国大陪审团对检察官的监督制约美国的大陪审团最初是仿照英国的陪审团制定的,…     

美国校园司法制度中陪审团问题的研究与启示

陪审团制度作为美国司法制度的重要组成部分发挥着重要的作用。在斯坦福大学《学生司法宪章》中，陪审团制度作为校园司法制度的核心，发挥着实践民主，实现公平的重要作用，它从校园陪审团成员的组成、陪审团制度的性质、陪审团工作的基本原则、陪审团的职责、证据证明标准及其裁决方式等方面保证了校园公平、公正、民主的实现，这些对我国当前高校学生处分程序制度的设计也具有一定的借鉴与启示意义。     

The Jury as a Translation of Democratic Participation and Political Conflict

In this response to Valerie Hans's Presidential address, I use her “legal translating” term to argue that the implementation of liberal democratic structures in new democracies opens new opportunities to translate the jury system into and onto new democratic societies. While policy makers have concerns about the strength and vibrancy of lay participation in the legal system, policy makers' decisions to adopt trial by jury are not always democratic. Nonetheless, the consequence of the translation of trial by jury furthers democratic development. Using Nicaragua, Mexico, and Russia as case studies, I suggest that one goal of policy makers who attempt to adopt trial by jury is to reduce the discretionary power of judges who remain from the prior government. Comparative trial‐by‐jury research can contribute more to our understanding of democratic development than prior research has indicated.     

关于在诉讼活动中设立人民陪审团制度的思考

现代陪审制度是司法机关吸收普通公民参与审判活动的制度,是一个国家政治民主在社会生活中的重要体现,其有助于保障法律有效实施.通过对我国现行人民陪审员制度的分析,揭示其目前存在诸如立法上的不足、专职陪审现象、陪而不审、审而不议、不能切实有效发挥作用等问题.同时以美国、日本为例,比较考察域外陪审制度,借鉴域外有益做法,并结合我国法治建设的实际,主张设立人民陪审团制度,可以有效强化司法裁判中事实认定的正当性和可接受性,真正实现司法民主,促进司法公正,提升司法公信力.     

陪审团在死刑案件中适用的价值分析

死刑案件作为最严重的案件,作为关涉公民生命权的案件,它的审判是我们在构建正当法律程序时需要关注的重点。文章以价值分析为主视角,从哲学思辨和实证分析入手,提出在我国的死刑案件中引入陪审团审判,以构建强大的死刑案件普通审程序之设想,试图通过在死刑案件中引入陪审团审判,扩大刑事司法中的民众参与和司法民主,促进司法公正和社会正义之实现。     

“人民的法院”与陪审制度——经典作家眼中的司法民主

司法民主的重要内容就是保障人民能够直接参与司法审判,而陪审制度正是作为由人民参与法庭审判,从而保证人民的观念与社会的良心在司法中得以实现的必要制度设计。马克思主义经典作家有关陪审制度与宪政关联的论述,阐明了陪审制度的性质、地位以及在确保司法公正、制约司法权力、保障人民自由等方面的重要作用,对我国当前的司法改革具有现实的指导意义。     

The representative jury requirement: Jury representativeness and cross sectional participation from the beginning to the end of the jury selection process

The paper specifically addresses the many ways in which the facially neutral procedures actually fail to secure representative jury pools. Although the Sixth Amendment's fair cross‐section requirement forbids systematic discrimination in the creation of the jury venire and panel, it does not guarantee that the criminal jury will in fact reflect an accurate cross‐section of the community. As a result, not only does the Court fail to focus on nonlegally recognized screening mechanisms and factors such as exemptions, excuses, failure to followup jurors, etc., may affect jury representativeness, but also the Court never examined cross‐sectional representation at the entirety of the jury selection processes, except jury panels and final juries.

The first section of this paper presents a brief overview of the constitutional law impacting impartial juries, especially addressing the fair cross‐section doctrine that is the focus of contemporary jury selection procedures. In providing empirical and systematic comparisons of jury participation at each of the distinct jury selection stages encompassing a general population, jury wheels, jury qualified pools, jury eligibles, jury panels, and actual trial jurors, the second section of this paper makes critical analyses of the cumulative effects of screening mechanisms in jury selection. The paper assesses jury compositions by looking at demographic, socio‐economic, and ideological profiles of prospective jurors, illustrating that those jury profiles do not necessarily reflect cross‐sectional representation of the community population at comprehensive stages of the jury selection process. The analytical findings show that unless some deep seated reforms are made to eliminate cumulative effects of selection biases and correct representative imbalances of jury wheels, qualified pools, jury panels, and trial juries, historically underrepresented groups such as racial minorities, the poor, and part‐time employees will continue to be underrepresented on juries, negating the public's shared responsibility for the administration of justice in one of America's most heralded democratic institutions.     

司法的大众化与平民化——英国治安法官制度管窥

在司法民主理念的支配下,不少国家采用民众参与审判的模式:陪审制和参审制,使司法不断走向大众化、平民化,促进司法的民主化。其实除了陪审制和参审制外,还有一种不为人所熟知的却实为一种最为彻底的民众参与审判的模式——治安法官制度。治安法官的产生、发展以及治安法官的选任和职责等方面,都突显其大众化、平民化的特征。     

JUST: a measure of jury system trustworthiness

ABSTRACT

Three studies developed and tested a new measure of the perceived trustworthiness of the jury system, the 23-item Jury System Trustworthiness (JUST) scale, and assessed the scale’s convergent and discriminant validity. Study 1 assessed the scale’s factor structure and relation to other relevant constructs. In Studies 2 and 3, the JUST scale was administered to participants in two separate mock juror studies. The results of all three studies supported the hypothesized factor structure of the measure but showed that a simplified, 7-item measure was also effective. Overall, participants’ perceptions of juries were moderately positive, and the JUST scale was related to attitudes toward the police, authoritarianism, belief in a just world, juror bias, preference for a jury (vs. a bench) trial, and intention to respond to a jury summons. It also explained a unique portion of the variance in jury-specific beliefs and behavioral intentions, such as preference for a jury trial and response to a summons, beyond that accounted for by other legal attitudes. The JUST scale was not related to verdict decisions in either mock trial after controlling for authoritarianism. Several individual differences (e.g. age, race/ethnicity) were also related to attitudes toward the jury system.     

Prospects and Limits of Democratic Governance in the EU

The EU Treaty contains for the first time a title on democratic principles. These provisions emphasise the importance of national parliaments and the EU parliament for the democratic legitimacy of the EU. The new chapter on democratic principles does not address the central challenge of the EU polity to the traditional understanding of democratic legitimacy, the disjunction of political and economic governance as expressed by the important role of independent institutions like the Commission, the European Central Bank and agencies in EU governance . This is a consequence of the fact that the status of independent regulatory institutions in a democratic polity has not been clarified—neither in the EU nor in the Member States. However, such independent institutions exist in diverse forms in several Member States and could hence be understood as a principle of democratic governance common to the Member States. Such an understanding has not yet evolved. The central theoretical problem is that regulatory theories which explain the legitimacy of independent institutions as an alternative to traditional representation remain outside the methodology of traditional democratic theory. Economic constitutional theory, based on social contract theory and widely neglected in the legal constitutional debate, offers a methodological approach to understanding independent regulatory institutions as part of representative democratic governance.     

欧洲近现代历史上宪政民主政制的生成、建构与演进

宪政民主政制与社会经济发展之间的关系,是一个值得深入进行理论探讨和实证研究的新课题。本文对西方宪政民主的起源、生成与演变史做了一个鸟瞰式的回顾,为探究宪政民主与经济发展之间的关系提供一些背景知识。在从词源和辞义上辨析了西方文字中的"constitution"以及以及与之对应的中文"宪法"和"宪政"的基本含义之后,本文对英国、法国和德国近现代宪政民主政制的生成、建构和演变史做了一些简略的历史考察,并在最后一部份对近现代欧洲历史上宪政民主政制下的法律制度的生成原因做了理论的和历史的分析。