林诉亚利桑那州案与美国的死刑陪审团制度

林诉亚利桑那州案是美国死刑量刑制度中一个具有里程碑意义的重要判例,自该案之后,美国联邦最高法院确立了陪审团在量刑中的无可替代的法律地位,即量刑中加重情节必须由陪审团而不是法官加以认定。该案的背景情况以及法律争议在美国死刑程序中极具代表性,对法官独立量刑州以及混合程序州均产生了重大影响,立法机构也作出了积极的回应,其深远的影响将极大地改变美国死刑制度的未来发展。     

Unearthing the realities of rape: Utilising Victorian newspaper reportage to fill in the contextual gaps

This article examines the realities of rape and sexual offences and their treatment through the legal process by use of media reportage, Victorian and modern; using this to contextualise and so to challenge the official record. The starting point is an identification of what constitutes ‹best’ evidence for an exploration of rape and sexual offences – evidence that permits better insights into the impact of such offences on the individuals involved, as well as into the factors governing the ability of the criminal justice process to promote the conviction rate in rape cases. By using a comparative historical perspective, and using media presentations (especially newspaper reportage) this article shows the enduring nature of stereotypes which govern the decisions reached by legal personnel and by jurors – stereotypes which have, since the Victorian period, remained profoundly gendered in ways that are unhelpful to the ‹victims’.     

司法制度中的几个法律语言学问题

法律语言学就是将语言学应用于法律问题的学科,司法制度中与语言学相关问题:语言与法律的关系、法律诉讼中语言学家的介入、语言学家与律师的关系、陪审团指令的理解、语言学家作为专家证人出庭等方面应该引起关注。     

人民陪审员制度的完善简

我国的人民陪审员制度无论在立法层面还是在司法实践中,均有偏离制度设立初衷之嫌：人民陪审员资格设定过高,陪审员的遴选行政化,陪审制的适用范围不清,当事人缺乏对程序的选择权等,造成实际运作中陪审员“陪而不审”、“合而不议”,陪审制形同虚设。因此,有必要降低人民陪审员的资格标准,完善个案陪审员的产生机制,加强陪审员在审判中的地位,使我国的人民陪审员制度发挥应有的作用。     

比较法视角下我国陪审制度的反思

陪审制度是一种特殊的诉讼制度,它体现出司法的民主性、司法审判的公正性,且有利于对公众进行较好的教育。我国现行的陪审制度存在着如相关立法缺失、人民陪审员的筛选机制不完备、陪审员选任中有"精英化"趋势等问题。实践中,应明确陪审制度的法律地位,强化相关法律规定;完善人民陪审员的筛选机制,做好对陪审人员的奖励、惩罚以及培训工作,避免出现人民陪审员"精英化"的现象。     

司法民主中的“冲突”——评《司法民主、公平正义与法官制度》

司法民主是一个大范畴,实现形式也多种多样。《司法民主、公平正义与法官制度》一书摆脱了对司法民主的泛泛而谈,而以我国司法民主的基本形式——人民陪审员制度为例来阐述司法民主,使读者对司法民主的概念更加清晰,理解也更加深入。司法职业化、司法独立与司法民主看似矛盾,但实际上却是司法民主的必要条件。司法民主化与司法职业化之间出现的悖论正是陪审制度未能有效发挥功能作用的症结所在。以陪审制度作为司法职业化与司法民主化之间的桥梁的观点较有新意。     

日本裁判员制度——通往司法民主的桥梁

裁判员制度是日本国民参与审判的形式,旨在把国民吸收到审判程序当中,使其主体性、实质性地参与到案件审理过程并影响案件审理的结果。裁判员享有与裁判官相同的权限,不仅能够认定案件事实,而且能够决定量刑。裁判员制度既不同于德国的参审制,也不同于美国的陪审制,具有日本特色,代表了日本司法制度日后发展的新动向。     

Impact of the popular legal participation on forced confessions and wrongful convictions in Japan＇s bureaucratic courtroom： A cross-national analysis in the U.S. and Japan

The interrogation and lengthy detention of the accused by Japan＇s police and prosecutors without access to legal counsel has generated many forced confessions in Japan＇s criminal court. As results, past research estimated that a large number of innocent people have been falsely convicted, and some of them were even executed for crimes they have not committed. Since almost all of indicted cases result in convictions in Japan＇s criminal court, allegations of wrongful convictions have raised serious human rights issues, and the use of forced confessions in criminal proceedings has long been criticized by families of the accused, their attorneys, legal scholars, citizen activists, and international human rights groups. This paper examines whether or not the 2009 introduction of the Saiban-in Saiban （the quasi-jury trial）, where ordinary citizens deliberate together with Japan＇s bureaucratic judges, helps prevent instances of wrongful convictions. As Japan＇s high conviction rate has substantiated that the Japanese court may be another bureaucratic system that is more interested in preserving its own authority and maintaining the status quo, the infusion of non-bureaucratic legal participants into the traditional judicial process may create the potential to alter the nature of trial processes, the quality of deliberations, and thus ultimate outcomes of criminal trials. Based on interviews and survey responses from Japan＇s grand jury （i.e., Kensatsu Shinsa-kai, or prosecutorial review commission （PRC）） participants and American citizens who served in jury trials, the paper explores the ways in which civic participation in criminal processes may affect the quality of legal decision making in Japan＇s criminal court.     

人民陪审制度的现状与思考

人民陪审制度存在许多问题 :参与意识不强 ,选任方法不严 ,业务素质不高 ,工作精力不足 ,物质保障不够。完善人民陪审制度应从立法、监督管理、物质保障等方面着手。     

Formal Legal Truth and Substantive Truth in Judicial Fact-Finding -- Their Justified Divergence in some Particular Cases

Truth is a fundamental objective of adjudicative processes; ideally, substantive as distinct from formal legal truth. But problems of evidence, for example, may frustrate finding of substantive truth; other values may lead to exclusions of probative evidence, e.g., for the sake of fairness. Jury nullification and jury equity. Limits of time, and definitiveness of decision, require allocation of burden of proof. Degree of truth-formality is variable within a system and across systems.