支持理论下民事诉讼当事人法律意识的实证研究

传统研究重视“法的供给”视角,致力于创设“良法良制”。通过转向“对法的需求”视角,本研究基于支持理论和法律意识理论,访谈了142名四类常见民事诉讼案件的当事人。本研究发现,当事人对司法的信赖分为“特定支持”和“普遍支持”两个维度。负面的诉讼经历仅会降低当事人对主审法官(法院)的评价(特定支持),尚未削弱他们对法院系统及司法制度的评价(普遍支持)。此外,当事人可以被进一步分为“门外汉”和“入门者”。前者不信赖法院的根本原因在于其法律意识与司法制度间存在巨大的冲突和矛盾;“入门者”的意识则限定于法律体系内,只在意法官的审判质量。随着司法系统的日渐完善,“入门者”对司法的信赖有望逐步提升。但“门外汉”则需要通过“知情(法)受益”这一过程先转化为“入门者”。     

Cases, Conflict, and Accommodation: Patterns of legal Interaction in an American Community

This article provides an overview of an empirical study of a civil trial court and the environment of indigenous law and conflict resolution in which the court operates. The article combines an analysis of civil cases and litigants with an investigation of alternative nonjudicial approaches used by residents of the community. The first section of the article examines the emergence of legal conflicts from the fabric of social relationships in the community and compares cases and parties in the court with those that gravitate toward nonjudicial settings. The second section compares processes and outcomes available in the court with those that may be obtained nonjudicially. The article concludes that different categories of cases emerge from different kinds of social relationships and for this reason are associated with fundamentally dissimilar patterns of values, norms, procedures, and outcomes. It also emphasizes the benefits to be obtained from investigating the complex relationships and interchanges that link local level trial courts to their communities.     

司法公正何以看得见——关于我国审判方式的思考

我国当前审判方式的缺点是，不能以看得见的方式实现司法公正：开庭方式无需当庭宣判，难免引人质疑；闭庭方式偏重书面材料，具有神秘色彩；特殊方式情形过于特殊，淡化外在标准。司法公正以看得见的方式实现，对审判方式提出的要求在于：尊重当事人的主体地位，法官的职权服务于当事人的权利；发挥法律职业共同体的作用，实现控辩力量的平衡；维护法官独立审判的权力，限制法官的任性。围绕司法公正以看得见的方式实现改革我国的审判方式，应当从内外两方面入手。内在方面是使审判方式改革与司法制度改革同步进行，关键是改革审判管理体制和陪审制度，并推行公开审判制度。外在方面是赋予现有的审判方式以新的活力，即突出开庭审判和当庭宣判的主导地位，闭庭方式与特殊方式限于基层人民法院在简易程序中合并适用，高级以上人民法院实行巡回审判。     

A Community‐Based Model for Remediating Juveniles Adjudicated Incompetent to Stand Trial: Feedback from Youth,Attorneys, and Judges

This study examined client satisfaction with a community‐based restoration services program for youth adjudicated incompetent to stand trial in Virginia. The sample consisted of 130 youth (ages 8‐21 years), 80 attorneys, and 43 juvenile court judges. Youth overwhelming found restoration services helpful to them, although some concepts were harder to learn than others. Both judges and attorneys were generally knowledgeable about juvenile competency law, although both were less knowledgeable about competency evaluators and the services provided to youth. Results will be used to improve teaching tools, training of Restoration Counselors, and communication between program providers and the legal community.     

PRO SE DIVORCE LITIGANTS

With the increased number of divorce litigants appearing pro se in the past century, trial court judges and court personnel are forced to deal with their conflicting obligations with more frequency. It is virtually impossible for a trial court judge to ensure all litigants have a fair and meaningful trial without compromising their neutrality. Likewise, court personnel are allowed to give out legal information but not legal advice, with the definition of legal information and advice not neatly packaged into two separate and distinct categories. Consequently, changes must be made. This note suggests various solutions that can be imposed to either reevaluate the role of trial court judges and court personnel so that they no longer have conflicting obligations and are able to accommodate the needs of the pro se litigants or implement services that can provide pro se litigants with other avenues of obtaining information and assistance.     

Domestic judicial defiance and the authority of international legal regimes

Tensions and occasional overt defiance of international courts suggest that compliance with international regimes is not a self-evident choice for domestic judges. I develop a formal theory of domestic judicial defiance in which domestic and supranational judges vie for jurisprudential authority in a non-hierarchical setting. The model emphasises the role of domestic non-compliance costs and power asymmetries in determining the conduct of domestic and international judges. I argue that the EU represents a special case of a particularly effective international regime. Weak domestic courts have little to gain from an escalated conflict with the European court of Justice. But even domestic judicial superpowers like the German Federal Constitutional Court have strong incentives to seek mutual accommodation with European judges. The analysis also yields new insights into concepts, such as “judicial dialogue” and “constitutional pluralism” that have featured prominently in the legal literature, and suggests new hypotheses for empirical research.     

Diversion in the Canadian Juvenile Justice System: A Tale of Two Cities

Abstract The present study attempted to evaluate the effectiveness of diversion in the juvenile justice system by comparing two different communities. One community has a formalized, well-established diversion program whereas the other community utilizes the Family Court to a much greater extent. Preliminary data suggests no difference in recidivism for a matched sample of young offenders. The implications of the study are discussed in terms of future research on diversion and the need for appropriate comparison groups. In the past two decades, diversion programs have been one of the major innovations within the juvenile justice system. These programs have attempted to divert juveniles from the formal process involving court hearings by creating alternative interventions at the policy and community level. The basic premises underlying these programs is that the formal court system may do more harm than good by labeling youngsters as “delinquent” and rendering them more vulnerable by involvement in an adversary process (Reference numbers 4, 12, 14). Diversion programs that provide youngsters with an opportunity to make restitution or perform community services are compensation for their misbehavior are seen as more immediate and meaningful consequences than awaiting a formal adversarial court hearing (5, 13). However, diversion programs have not met with universal acceptance. Critics have pointed out that programs, in fact, “widen the justice net” by processing children who never would have gone to court anyway (3, 7). As well, concerns have been raised as to the protection of clients' legal rights in the diversion program and the dangers of “double jeopardy” in the event that failure in a program could lead to an even more severe disposition by the court (8, 9). The debate over the effectiveness of diversion programs has been fueled by the lack of research. Although there are many studies that suggest the success of this approach (1, 6, 10), the research has suffered in its credibility due to the absence of appropriate control groups. The present study attempted to fill this significant void in previous evaluations of diversion, by comparing two communities in southwestern Ontario with different approaches to juvenile justice. The cities of Windsor and London are approximately 200 km apart, with comparative populations (200,000 vs 250,000). Windsor has well established diversion programs with substantial support of community agencies, the police force and Crown Attorney's office. This program is described in detail elsewhere (2, 11) so will not be outlined here. London has no such program and consequently has an obviously greater number of youngsters handled through the formalized juvenile court. The authors hoped to capitalize on this “naturally occurring difference” in approach between the two cities by examining the rate of recidivism of young offenders as well as determine their attitudes (and that of their parents) toward the interventions they received. The hypotheses in the pilot studies outlined were that the diversion program youth in Windsor would have a more positive attitude about their intervention and would be less likely to recidivate than a matched sample of youth in London, based on the theoretical underpinning of diversion as well as the results of previous outcome studies.     

The media coverage of court proceedings in Europe: Striking a balance between freedom of expression and fair process

Press curiosity to report on legal proceedings has been a salacious feature in history of mass media. Pre-trial comment, media coverage of press proceedings and the protection of privacy of the defendant are some of the main legal issues which are raised by the ambiguous relation of media to court proceedings. The Internet revolution and the emergence of the blogosphere have added a new dimension to the analysis of these legal issues. A balance between freedom of expression and the guarantee of a fair unprejudiced process has to be achieved in the context of application of legal mechanisms of protection of the justice’s authority, such as contempt of court. As regards the question of media coverage of the court proceedings, the decision of the UK Supreme Court on May 2011 to permit television coverage of its hearings demonstrates an important shift as regards how publicity is perceived by the administration of justice in the UK, while there is a certain disparity between national legislators in the way they deal with this issue at a European level. The legal question of the protection of the defendant through the effective guarantee of the presumption of innocence and, consequently, that of a fair trial is often combined with the debate about the right of the defendant’s privacy not only when there is a pressing social need for information to the public before or during the court trial but also many years after the end of the legal proceedings.     

The Limits of Legal Pluralism in the Roman Empire

The Roman empire was legally pluralistic. But what exactly does this entail in concrete terms? With the growth in historical studies of legal pluralism in the Roman empire, some significant differences in approach have emerged. This article tests and clarifies some of the limits in the current ‘legal pluralism’ conceptual landscape, focussing on disputes and dispute resolution. It is argued that a clearer distinction should be drawn between ‘normative’ and ‘jurisdictional’ pluralism, though both approaches still raise certain conceptual problems. The place of disputes within the family within this wider institutional picture is then taken as a case study in the final part of the paper, and it is suggested that while family disputes can evidence ‘legal pluralism’ in the ‘norms’ sense, there is less to suggest that there were a multitude of officially sanctioned legal fora available for resolving family disputes. As a result, many went beyond the law. This has wider implications for the study of legal pluralism in antiquity and the problem of integrating alternative dispute resolution (ADR) into the pluralistic picture.     

The Transmission of Legal Precedent Across the Australian State Supreme Courts Over the Twentieth Century

This article considers several possible determinants of the transmission of legal precedent across Australian state supreme courts over the course of the twentieth century. The study finds that that the transmission of legal precedent is higher between State supreme courts that are more physically proximate and between state supreme courts in which a majority of judges in both courts are appointed by conservative governments. The study further finds that having an intermediate trial court and providing appointments to the High Court of Australia are correlated with whether a state is a source of interstate citations or a cue sender.     

Public Opinion of Teen,Classroom, and Formal Court Styles

The present research examined the views of a community sample regarding teen court, classroom court, and formal/traditional court. Participants read vignettes of teen offenders who had committed crimes of high or low severity and were given relatively severe or mild sentences through one of the three courts. Results revealed stronger support for teen court than the other courts, a general preference for harsh sentences, and a preference for match between crime and punishment. The results of this study indicate that teen courts are seen as providing an appropriate means to sentence juvenile offenders and are likely to receive public support for their continued operation.     

Legal,Psychological, and Behavioral Outcomes

States have responded to the public's outrage at rising juvenile crime by revising their transfer statutes to make it easier to transfer juvenile offenders for trial and sentencing in criminal court and possible incarceration in adult prisons. These changing trends in juvenile justice raise three questions about what actually happens to juveniles once they are in the adult criminal justice system. To what extent does trial in adult court and/or incarceration in adult prisons promote or retard community protection, juvenile offenders' accountability, and the development of competencies in juvenile offenders? This article discusses state transfer laws and the legal consequences of criminal court prosecution, and analyzes current research on deterrence effects of transfer laws, conviction and sentencing in juvenile versus criminal court, recidivism rates in juvenile versus criminal court, and conditions and programming in juvenile versus adult correctional facilities. The research findings have two important implications for juvenile justice policy: the number of juvenile cases transferred to criminal court should be minimized, and imprisonment of juveniles in adult facilities should be avoided whenever possible. These implications are discussed, and directions for future research are identified.     

难以辨识的法院庭审管理——以药家鑫案庭审发放意见表为中心

药家鑫案引发了颇多可供讨论的法律问题,比如媒体与司法的关系、司法民主与司法公正的关联等。仅就一审法院在庭审中发放"旁听案件反馈意见表"的行为来说,就可以映射出许多关于当前中国司法改革的样态。究其本质,发放意见表实则难属司法行为或审判行为,其更多地表现为一种法院的管理行为。从庭审管理的角度而言,这一行为彰显了在当前集权体制下行政化的法院管理模式逐渐难堪的现实,同时也反映了当前法院还算占绝对优势控制的庭审管理环节深受媒体和舆论的压制而艰难前行的无奈,并且还反映了法院在以政治为首要职能的高压下难以实施专业性技能管理的困境。     

民事诉讼法律审的功能及构造

为了满足法律适用的统一性要求,有必要在我国民事诉讼中实行有条件的法律审制度。引起法律审的事由应当是裁判违法,包括违反法院应当适用的法律规范,违反日常经验法则等,裁判违法应当与裁判结果具有因果关系;当事人提起法律审应经由原审法院;法律审仅审理法律适用问题且仅以上诉人主张的范围为限;法律审的裁决对重审法院应当具有约束力。     

民事审理的集中化研究——以庭审程序为中心

庭审是集中审理的关键,集中审理的主要内容是在开庭审理中得以落实的,审理是否实现了集中化也主要是在开庭审理阶段体现出来。对于我国是否实现了审理的集中化,还存在比较大的争议。但我国立法上并没有严格区分审前程序和庭审程序,虽然有些案件表现出来的是只经过一次庭审即告终结,但这实际上是建立在多次"非正式开庭"基础上的。而且由于"非正式开庭"喧宾夺主成为法官获取案件信息的主要渠道,开庭本身都不具有实质意义,就更谈不上有集中、连续地开庭审理的可能。有鉴于此,为了实现审理的集中化,就需要对现有的开庭审理程序进行改革和完善。     

Assessing Pretrial Publicity Effects: Integrating Content Analytic Results

When a case has received pretrial publicity which has the capacity to bias potential jurors in the trial venue, a change of venue is one means of attempting to ensure that the defendant receives a fair trial. Content analysis of the pretrial publicity surrounding a case can provide the court with important information to consider when determining whether prejudice in the relevant community is too great for the defendant to receive a fair trial. This paper presents an approach to content analysis of pretrial publicity that draws upon both legal commentary and past empirical social science research. It is a systematic approach that could be employed by both the prosecution and defense when presenting arguments to the court about whether a change of venue should be granted. Information gleaned from content analysis of the publicity surrounding a specific case fills the gap between information provided by experimental research which has examined pretrial publicity effects and public opinion polls concerning the public's perception of the defendant in a particular case. Results from a content analysis can serve to validate public opinion survey data gathered from the same locales. To exemplify this content analytic approach, a content analysis conducted by the authors in preparation for the change of venue hearing in the case of Timothy McVeigh is presented.     

Two models of formal social control

In recent years there has been an increasing concern with the link between judicial decisions and the socio-political attributes of the environment in which courts function. Little attention has been paid to the link between attorneys' advice and that same court environment. This study fills the gap.In this paper two models of formal social control are developed—a legalist and a decentralized model. The effect of this environmental factor on attorneys' forum advice is examined.Forum advice data were collected on 143 attorneys in Maryland, Louisiana, and Texas. The data were analyzed using analysis of variance for repeated measures. It was found that a state's adopted model of formal social control does affect attorneys' judge-jury advice. Attorneys in legalist states are more likely to advise the judge trial than are attorneys in decentralized states. This effect was mediated, however, by the race of the client, the racial composition of the community in which the case was to be heard, and the seriousness of the offense. With increasing levels of legalism, attorneys representing blacks based their judge-jury advice on both the seriousness of the offense and the racial composition of the community in which the case is to be heard. With increasing levels of legalism, attorneys of white clients based their forum advice solely on the seriousness of the offense.     

以审判为中心的庭审模式对法医出庭质证的挑战

以审判为中心的庭审模式是当今诉讼改革的主要方向,案件庭审实质化是诉讼改革的主要目标,在此背景下,法医鉴定人出庭质证将会实质化、常态化。为此,最高人民法院等部门出台了保障鉴定人出庭的相关规定、规则。法医鉴定意见质证实质化要求法医鉴定人在出庭时履行相关义务:尊重法庭、如实回答提问、释明鉴定意见。当前法医参加庭审质证中存在法医鉴定人出庭率低、鉴定意见的法律性质不明确、鉴定人出庭的具体要求不明确、与包括专家辅助人在内的其他专家证据形式的冲突等问题。为此,笔者向法医鉴定人提出三点建议:不断学习,提升专业技能;加强修炼,提高法律知识;注重实践,强化表达能力。     

FAMILY COURTS-20 YEARS AFTER REFORM

The Rt. Hon. Dame Elias discusses the changes the people of Australia and New Zealand have seen and can expect from their respective family courts. She goes on to say that if judges of the family court are to play a more positive role in society, they need to stay abreast of what is happening with current legal trends as they relate to the "best interest of the child" standard, equal rights (especially between genders), and changing international trends in family law. The Chief Justice also addresses problems concerning lack of legal aid funding and an increase in unrepresented litigants. The Chief Justice explains that these issues and problems can best be dealt with through legislative reform as well as family court reform. Where there is an influx of additional resources better preparing judges to deal specifically with those seeking justice in the family court, these additional resources should also lead to a greater general understanding of current trends in the community. Chief Justice Elias asserts that without community support, these issues cannot be resolved.