司法亚文化的负向功能研究

发布时间：2018-02-10 14:58

本文关键词： 司法亚文化越轨结构功能主义失范理论司法职业群体　出处：《中国政法大学》2011年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：亚文化可以有不同的分类方法,按照其主体类型来分,司法亚文化便是其中的一种。按照中国现今的司法体制,司法亚文化要研究的对象是公检法等司法职业群体中的亚文化。司法文化相对于整个社会来说是亚文化,而司法亚文化相对于司法文化来说,也是亚文化。亚文化这个概念一直多是在社会学及犯罪学中使用,但将它与司法职业群体联系起来的研究和论述还不多见。这不仅是因为文化本身的定义和理论范式很难规定,同时也是因为亚文化可能会被戴上“非主流”与“不正常”的标签,从而不会被与司法职业群体联想起来。但实际上,亚文化现象的存在有其固有的根源,也具备正向或负向的功能。正视亚文化现象,才能正确看待现今的司法职业群体中发生的各种现象,并从新的角度对之进行解读。在对司法亚文化尝试着做出界定后,借助结构功能主义,找出司法制内在结构的设置与司法亚文化功能之间的联系。社会功能当然既有正向功能,也有负向功能。相比较正向功能,我们更为关注负向功能。本文通过对引起社会极大关注的“赵作海”案件全过程中所表现出来的一些违法司法亚文化表现形态的阐述,总结出司法亚文化的几大负向功能。对其负向功能的研究不仅仅是因为它们代表着当今我国司法实践领域存在的一些重要弊端,更重要的是我们尝试从默顿的失范理论----失范是由于传统文化的价值目标与合法的制度性手段中间的冲突,对司法亚文化的负向功能,实际上也就是违法司法亚文化进行犯罪学解读,从一个新的角度去观察这种违法司法亚文化和中国司法制度中的种种问题。司法亚文化概念的推出和研究有助于强调法治的实质正义。无论是“马锡五式审案法”还是“里心模式”,它们在遵循“以事实为依据,以法律为准绳”这个大前提的基础上,灵活的根据所处环境,利用不同的条件、环境和人力资源,基于“地方性知识”,去努力的达到一种他们认为的“公平正义”的结果。这不仅符合我国国情,也一定程度上达到了实质公平与客观真实的结果。但我们更应该关注的是司法亚文化与主流司法文化之间冲突产生的违法司法亚文化。不仅因为它们会直接侵害当事人的合法权益,影响司法职业群体的形象,更重要的是它会损害法律实体和程序上的客观公正。本文总结出司法亚文化的三大负向功能,破坏公平正义、敌意思维与司法腐败,并结合失范理论分析了其成因,希望最终可以对司法亚文化的负向功能产生的前因后果进行一个明确的梳理。
[Abstract]:Subcultures can be classified in different ways. According to the type of subject, judicial subculture is one of them. According to China's current judicial system, The subject of judicial subculture is the subculture of judicial professional groups such as Public Security Bureau, Procuratorate, Court, etc. Judicial culture is subculture relative to the whole society, and judicial subculture is relative to judicial culture. It is also subculture. The concept of subculture has always been used in sociology and criminology, but there are few studies and expositions linking it to judicial professional groups. This is not only because the definition and theoretical paradigm of culture itself is difficult to define. It is also because subcultures may be labelled as "non-mainstream" and "abnormal", so that they will not be associated with judicial professional groups. But in fact, the existence of subcultural phenomena has its inherent roots. It also has the function of positive or negative. Only by facing the phenomenon of subculture can we correctly look at all kinds of phenomena occurring in the judicial profession groups and interpret them from a new angle. After trying to define judicial subculture, with the help of structural functionalism, we find out the relationship between the internal structure of judicial system and the function of judicial subculture. There is also a negative function. Compared with the positive function, we pay more attention to the negative function. Through the elaboration of some forms of illegal judicial sub-cultural expression in the whole process of the "Zhao Zuohai" case, which has aroused great social concern, This paper summarizes several negative functions of judicial subculture. The research on their negative functions is not only because they represent some important drawbacks in the field of judicial practice in our country. What is more important is that we try to use Merton's theory of anomie as a result of the conflict between the value goal of traditional culture and the legal institutional means, and the negative function of judicial subculture. In fact, it is illegal judicial subculture to interpret criminology, from a new angle to observe this kind of illegal judicial subculture and various problems in Chinese judicial system. The introduction and study of the concept of judicial subculture helps to emphasize the substantive justice of the rule of law. Whether it is the Maxi-Wu-style trial Law or the "Lixin Model", they follow the premise of "taking facts as the basis and the law as the yardstick". Using different conditions, environment and human resources, and based on "local knowledge", to strive to achieve what they consider to be "fair and just" results. This is not only in line with the national conditions of our country, But we should pay more attention to the conflict between the judicial subculture and the mainstream judicial culture, not only because they will directly violate the judicial subculture, but also achieve the result of substantial fairness and objective truth to a certain extent, but we should pay more attention to the conflict between the judicial subculture and the mainstream judicial culture. The legitimate rights and interests of the parties, This paper summarizes the three negative functions of judicial subculture, which destroy fairness, hostility and corruption. And combined with the theory of anomie analysis of its causes, hoping that the negative function of judicial subculture can eventually be a clear combing of the causes and consequences of the negative function.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D916

【引证文献】