南京国民政府最高法院战时改革研究

发布时间：2018-03-13 19:16

本文选题：抗日战争　切入点：最高法院　出处：《西南政法大学》2012年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：本文旨在通过考察抗日战争时期最高法院的改革活动，总结并反思其宝贵的经验和深刻的历史教训。《引论》阐述了相关学术研究及本文研究的价值。客观系统的阐述最高法院战时的改革，其中最高法院设置分庭的方法，为司法权地方化这一司法史难题指出了解决路径，反思了政治对最高法院战时改革的影响及司法党化问题对司法独立的影响。本文采用历史唯物主义方法论及数据分析方法。第一部分，在抗战建国及国民党推行“司法党化”政治背景下，分析了抗战时期最高法院在司法工作中存在的困境，一是其与中央相对隔绝的区域无法进行司法审判；二是战时法令在抗战期间大量颁布，其施行中争议较多，且在与中央隔绝的区域无法有效施行；三是通货膨胀严重，民事司法审判标的额标准需重新确定；四是最高法院审理案件数量大、压力大；五是司法党化对最高法院的司法独立的影响。第二部分，陈述并分析了抗战时期最高法院为适应抗战进行的改革及改革争议，一是其机构的改革，主要是指最高法院在地方新设的分庭；二是其统一法令解释权的变革；三是其第三审存废之争；四是其第三审民事诉讼标的额的变革。第三部分，功在战时，利在千秋，我认为任何学术研究最终目的都应是“学以致用”，在现代社会最高法院做为一个重要的司法机关，用现代的视角来研究战时最高法院，，才能更好的解释其研究对于民国司法史及中国最高法院的价值和意义。这部分探讨最高法院战时改革对我国司法史留下的宝贵经验及教训，其一制约司法权地方化的历史启迪，同时讨论了国外制约司法权地方化的历史经验，最终得出在人、财、物等各方面加强中央对法院系统的直接管理，可以有效制约司法权地方化；二是战时司法党化问题给我们敲响警钟，强调党义不能替代法律和正义，政治正义不能替代司法正义，法官应做到司法中立，要实现司法独立必须保障司法不党；三是抗战时期最高法院第三审存废争议对中国审级制度的启示；四是带有根本缺陷的战时本土的“能动司法理论”，纵观战时最高法院的改革，其背后具有鲜明的政治色彩，最后着重批判了最高法院的改革具有强烈的政治倾向，强调司法改革不应以政治为逻辑起点。
[Abstract]:The purpose of this paper is to summarize and reflect on its valuable experience and profound historical lessons by examining the reform activities of the Supreme Court during the War of Resistance against Japan. The introduction expounds the relevant academic research and the value of this paper. Objectively and systematically expounds the reform of the Supreme Court in wartime, in which the Supreme Court sets up a chamber, which points out the way to solve the judicial history problem of localization of judicial power. This paper reflects on the influence of politics on the wartime reform of the Supreme Court and the influence of judicial partisanship on judicial independence. This paper adopts the methodology of historical materialism and the method of data analysis. The first part, under the background of the establishment of the Anti-Japanese War and the implementation of "judicial partying" by the Kuomintang, analyzes the dilemma of the Supreme Court in the judicial work during the War of Resistance against Japan. Second, during the War of Resistance against Japan, the wartime law was issued in a large number, which was controversial in its implementation, and could not be effectively implemented in areas isolated from the central government; third, the inflation was serious, and the standard of the target amount of civil justice should be re-determined; Fourth, the number of cases heard by the Supreme Court is large and the pressure is great; the fifth is the influence of judicial partisanship on the judicial independence of the Supreme Court. The second part states and analyzes the reform and disputes of the Supreme Court in order to adapt to the War of Resistance against Japan during the War of Resistance against Japan, one is the reform of its organization, mainly refers to the new chamber set up by the Supreme Court in the local areas, the other is the reform of the power of interpretation of its unified decrees; Third, the third instance of the existence and abolition of the dispute, fourth, the third trial of the object of civil action changes. The third part, merit in wartime, benefit in thousands of years. I think that the ultimate purpose of any academic research should be to "apply learning to use". As an important judicial organ in modern society, the Supreme Court of War should study the Supreme Court in wartime from a modern perspective. In order to better explain the value and significance of its research to the judicial history of the Republic of China and the Supreme Court of China, this part explores the valuable experience and lessons left by the wartime reform of the Supreme Court to the judicial history of our country. One is the historical enlightenment that restricts the localization of judicial power. At the same time, the historical experience of restricting the localization of judicial power abroad is discussed. Finally, it is concluded that strengthening the direct management of the court system by the central authorities in the aspects of people, money and property can effectively restrict the localization of judicial power. Second, the issue of judicial partying in wartime has sounded the alarm bell for us, emphasizing that party justice cannot replace law and justice, political justice cannot substitute for judicial justice, judges should be judicial neutral, and the realization of judicial independence must ensure that the judiciary is not a party; The third is the enlightenment of the third instance of the Supreme Court to the Chinese trial system during the War of Resistance against Japan, the fourth is the native "active judicial theory" with fundamental defects, which has a clear political color behind the reform of the Supreme Court during the War of War. Finally, the author emphatically criticizes the strong political tendency of the reform of the Supreme Court, and emphasizes that the judicial reform should not take politics as the logical starting point.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D929;D926.21

【参考文献】