深化改革背景下对司法行政化的遏制

司法行政化,即以行政的目的、构造、方法、机理及效果取代司法自身的内容,形成以行政方式操作的司法。法院司法运作的全过程均带有行政化色彩,表现为司法目的和价值的行政化、案件审判活动的行政化、上下级法院关系的行政化、司法人事制度和法院结构的行政化以及审判管理的行政化等。在给定的约束条件下,司法行政化可以弥补一线司法能力之不足,可以抗制外部干预。但其过度发展会妨碍依法治国,损害办案质量与效率,危及司法权威和公信力,阻碍法院工作的可持续发展。司法行政化的根源在于基本权力结构及其运行机制;司法功能设定的非司法化和资源配置的有限性,统一的人事管理制度和财政供应制度以及国家机能分化不足,亦为重要原因。遏制司法行政化需强化法院的司法审查功能、审判功能以及终局性纠纷解决功能;需阻隔行政性要素介入审判,建立审判独立的"二元模式";需在法院审判管理、司法行政管理、上下级法院业务管理上"去行政化"。     

审判中心视角下的行政诉讼制度构造

"以审判为中心"的政法政策同样适用于行政诉讼制度改革,它要求法院发挥自身司法能力和司法制度能力,有效地介入涉法行政争议之中,并藉此保护法益。在行政诉讼中,司法权与行政权之间是法律监督上的国家权力结构关系。法院优位于行政机关,法院作为独立裁判者指挥诉讼管理关系和裁判过程。以审判为中心的行政诉讼制度构造,应最大限度地发挥法院司法能力在解决行政争议上的优位角色,应完整地发挥行政诉讼法的制度能力,即发挥立法、司法解释、司法组织及指导性案例的制度功能。行政诉讼司法准入、行政机关负责人出庭应诉、诉讼管辖、庭审制度等,是否体现了"以审判为中心"的制度改革方向,主要看其是否有利于行政争议的实质解决和法益有效保护。"多元化纠纷解决机制"政策和行政行为合法性审查为中心的行政诉讼制度,影响了法院的诉讼角色和功能。回归司法权和诉讼制度本质,宜在行政争议、行政行为和法益之间构造出一致性的诉讼结构关系;宜从组织和体制改革转向程序改革,发挥行政程序和司法程序在塑造司法公正和司法效率上的作用。     

调解的技术合理性——一种中观的组织结构-功能论的解读

调解的同等组织结构,为嵌入该结构的民意沟通提供了平等而自由的“理想的言谈情景”,形成了“主体间性”和“主体间性结构”,为充分、深入而成功的民意沟通提供了可能和技术保障,并在沟通中滋生出一种建基于自身组织技术上的既不同于立法也有别于司法审判的沟通合法性,即技术合理性.制度的命运最终决定于自身技术.调解之所以能长存于古今中外,在于自身的技术合理性,而不是外在的意识形态因素.     

论刑事司法体制改革与诉讼结构之调整

应当确立以法院为中心的刑事司法外部体制,建立以审判为中心、审判中立、控审分离、控辩平等的诉讼结构;同时应当构建以法官为中心的刑事司法内部体制。刑事审判前程序、死刑复核程序、再审程序、执行程序也应当按照改革后的刑事司法体制以及诉讼结构的要求进行诉讼化改造。     

论司法审判中的行政领导观念

<正> 我国人民法院内部的行政管理工作,与人民法院进行的司法审判工作,具有不同的性质。行政管理工作有其固有观念、模式与方法,司法审判工作有其特有的观念与法定的程序,二者不可混淆。但近年来,我国法院工作中,出现了以行政权支配审判权,以法院行政领导取代司法审判     

谈法院司法行政工作的自行管理——法院改革探讨之五

关于法院司法行政工作到底由谁管理为好,是一个有争论的问题。近年来常有这样一种议论,认为法院司法行政工作应当由司法行政机关管理,以利于法院依法独立进行审判。这种论调不仅影响目前法院的建设,更主要的是可能影响将来法院司法行政工作管理的归属。我们认为,法院的司法行政工作应当由法院自行管理,这样有利于搞好法院司法行政工作,进而有利于保障法院依法独立进行审判。     

中外司法体制比较研究

所谓司法体制,国际上通行有广义司法体制和狭义司法体制之分。狭义的司法体制仅指法院体制,广义的司法体制则包括审判体制、检察体制、侦查体制、裁判执行体制和为保障司法机关正常运营的司法行政体制及其相互关系。本文采广义司法体制的概念,并参照中国现行的司法体制进行分类,以便于中国人理解并便于与国外和我国台湾地区进行比较。一、审判体制在此广义司法体制语境下,审判体制即法院体制。一般来说,国外的法院体制比较简单,有的简单到就是法院的审判体系。而中国的法院体制比较复杂,除了审判体制外,还包括许多司法行政体制。     

评基层法院知识产权司法保护的基础结构

在2011年11月召开的全国法院知识产权审判工作座谈会上,最高人民法院副院长奚晓明指出,最高法院不断加强知识产权审判基层基础建设,创新基层工作指导方式,实施了"三五工程",就是在五所大学设立知识产权司法保护理论研究基地;在五个中级法院设立知识产权司法保护调研基地;确定五个区法院为知识产权审判基层示范法院。推动建立更为科学的知识产权审判体制和工作机制,是最高人民法院坚持知识产权审判领域改革创新的一个重要方面。从中级法院、基层法院知识产权案件管辖布局的优化,到进一步推广涉及知识产权民事、行政和刑事案件"三审合一"的试点工作,可以看到知识     

解读司法改革——走向权能、资源与责任之新的均衡

本轮司法改革由最高决策层以顶层设计方式启动,意味着权能、资源和责任将在法官、检察官等微观的主体层面重新分配.改革的初始条件、环境或对象是作为“紧密型组织”的法院行政化管理及审判的“集体决策/责任扩散”机制与各种外部因素之间通过复杂的互动或“博弈”过程而形成的脆弱均衡.决策者推进司法改革应当是出于某种政治决断,改革的内容指向“审判独立”,其归结可能是促使“司法独立”的进一步实现.     

破产法中法院审判职能的理性回归与改革路径探析

本文认为,新破产法对法院的职能定位存在着公权越位和私权错位的立法失误。当前破产法中法院职能应向"去行政化"与"去民事化"方向改革,以实现破产审判职能的理性回归。在"去行政化"改革方面,可以在现行司法行政体系内设置破产管理人监管处(科)的司法行政管理部门,并推行破产管理人执业许可制度;在"去民事化"改革方面,在破产管理人的选任和报酬确定上,则应实行以债权人会议决定为主、人民法院指定为辅的立法模式。     

Between Hermes and Themis: An Empirical Study of the Contemporary Judiciary in Singapore

Drawing upon interviews in 1995 and 1998 and analyses of judicial appointments from 1975–1998, the article offers a new explanation of judicial-executive relations in Singapore. It attempts to explain how the judiciary in Singapore actually functions, partly by using the concept of the core executive to locate the judiciary more accurately within its political context. The study demonstrates that the judicial system has been hegenomized by a number of political and bureaucratic strategies, and interprets its role in terms of the overall goals of the political executive. The lower judiciary is an amateur judiciary and forms part of the executive government. Despite this, the contemporary superior judiciary is not wholly a creature of the political executive, as is often postulated, but rather the result of a compromise which balances the need for a reputable judiciary with the requirement by the political executive for the judicial system to assist with the control of political opposition. This negotiated balance is qualitatively different from the relationship that characterized that between the Lee Kuan Yew governments and their Supreme Courts until 1991 and reflects the maturing of hegemonic control strategies under Goh Chok Tong. The analysis was completed in 1999.     

“冤案”与司法活动——从卡夫卡《审判》看

冤案研究应从日常司法的关于是否存在冤案的对立认识入手,而非公认冤案。而发生对立认识时,基于角色担当和功能作用的理由,应主要支持司法活动。社会公众及个人,在冤案对立认识及日常活动中,也有自己的行动责任。卡夫卡《审判》是展开这些探讨的极佳素材。     

法律职业中的女性

女性参与法律职业的历史告诉我们,女性曾经被拒之于法律职业的门外。但是经过相当长时间的历史发展,现在女性人数在司法界快速增长,比例提高,女性在法律职业和法学研究中的地位不断提高,从而使更多的女性价值和女性经验得以实现。女性及女性思维给法律和司法带来了新鲜空气和变革力量,法律和司法的形象和理念也在发生微妙的变化。     

Entering the Australian Judiciary: Gender and Court Hierarchy

There is considerable attention to increasing judicial diversity along a range of dimensions, in particular, gender. Women remain underrepresented in many courts, especially at the higher levels of the judiciary. A comprehensive socio‐legal study of the Australian judiciary compares experiences and attitudes of women who have become judicial officers at different levels of the court hierarchy. Understanding their personal and professional backgrounds and the features that attracted them to the judiciary has important implications for addressing gender disparity. Effective recruitment and selection must focus on the expectations and experiences of women in relation to particular judicial contexts.     

论司法改革与司法公正

司法公正涵括了程序公正和实体公正两层涵义。程序公正指在整个司法过程中公正地对待作为当事人的冲突主体 ,保证冲突主体能足够和充分地表述自己的愿望、主张和请求的手段及其行为的空间。而实体公正则是指判决结果对案件真实情况的准确再现以及法律适用的正确无误。程序公正与实体公正两者是辩证统一的。我国现行司法体制的结构性缺陷正在于公正的缺失。而正在进行的司法改革的目标定位正是为了重塑司法公正。为此 ,在改革的动力资源上 ,必须依赖国家与社会的双向互动 ,在改革的路径选择上 ,需要在本土化的基础上走创新型制度移植的道路。     

Rule of law,national judges and the Court of Justice of the European Union: Let's keep it juridical

The debate on the rule of law in the EU is mainly taking place from an EU law point of view, stemming from the analysis of CJEU judgments and its interpretation of general principles and primary EU law. This article argues that only by comprehending the global context of rise of populism and delegitimation of the judiciary may we realise the risks that national judges and the CJEU started to take when they entered the stage of this discussion. An overview is made of the global trend of delegitimation of the judiciary, referring to the example of Poland. The author then analyses how the CJEU and national courts, while defending the rule of law, are also mutually contributing to their own protection against external threats, and why that dialogue is essential to keep the debate juridical, as a way of avoiding what the author identifies as the “populist trap to the judiciary”.     

THE PRESS AND THE JUDICIARY： COURT AND JUDICIAL REPORTS IN THE PREss IN ENGLAND AND WALES

Western scholars have argued that image making and image management are a preoccupation of the judiciary. Images of the judiciary may take a variety of forms and be produced for kinds of audiences. One form of judicial image making and image management is live performances in the courtroom and other court settings. Another is the written judgment where the preoccupation is the style of the written text. Press and other mass media reports of judicial activity are another. The audience for judicial images is equally diverse, from fellow judges, lawyers in the courts and the wider legal community, the litigants before the courts to the executive, legislature and the public both in the courtroom and beyond. The image of the judiciary that is available to the public has a particular significance in Western rule of law democracies. As a general rule courts and the judiciary are required to operate in public and their activities must be open to public scrutiny. A recent policy manifestation of this goal is debated about confidence in the justice system and initiatives designed to improve confidence. In the majority of cases public scrutiny of judicial activity and public confidence in the judiciary relies upon the media. Objective and accurate press and media reports play a key role in shaping public understanding of the judiciary and generating or undermining confidence in that institution. Reports in regional and national newspapers have long been an important source of information, shaping public knowledge and facilitating public scrutiny of the justice system. In the UK, there is almost no scholarship on these representations past or present. The result is little known about the representation of the courts and the judiciary in press reports. Little is known about what the diligent reader of these reports can learn about judicial activity. The aim of this article is to take a first step towards changing that state of affairs. It uses a data set made up of 205 contemporary domestic newspaper reports of court and judi     

Picking up the pace – legal slowness and the authority of the judiciary in the acceleration society (a Dutch case study)

This paper inquires into the nature of the crisis haunting the judiciary in our contemporary society. Drawing upon the work of Hartmut Rosa, it is stated that our society is an acceleration society and that this puts the judiciary under great pressure. The resulting crisis is twofold since it is both of an organizational and fundamental nature. The focus of this paper is on the – in our view – underexposed latter crisis because of its effect on the very core of the judiciary, namely the legitimacy and authority. The judiciary is confronted with the demand to speed up, whereas the nature of the legal system seems to reject an accelerated tempo and even needs a certain degree of slowness to communicate its accuracy. It is not just the process of acceleration that erodes or at least changes the authority of the judiciary but it concerns a complex interplay of expectations induced by acceleration, both externally by justice seeking citizens and internally by the judiciary’s own management and politics, and how these expectations are met, or not. This is illustrated by a case study on the position of the Dutch judiciary, but holds true for other national and international adjudication as well.     

欧洲国家宪法法官制度初论

在20世纪,欧洲生成并发展出颇具特色的宪法法院制度,宪法法官作为宪法法院的决策主体承担了保障宪政生活中的合宪性这一重要使命。它们普遍建立了精英型宪法法官体系,通过任命机制控制宪法法官构成,使之具有合理性;同时,它们极力保障宪法法官的独立性,为其提供充分的权利保障及物质支持,并通过严格规范职业行为来保障宪法法官有效履行职责。