司法管理与审判权的公正运行

发布时间：2018-06-28 08:13

本文选题：司法管理 + 审判公正　；参考：《法律适用》2016年06期

【摘要】：实证数据表明,审判公正在中国远未合乎公众期待。对于审判权的公正运行,传统的学术研究更主要立足内部视角,侧重审判权体系内的"相对自我调整"而忽视审判体系在外力持续推动下的完善与发展,且容易陷入理论的"循环论证"。在司法管理这一外部视角下,司法审判便是法院生产"判决"产品的过程。判决质量是否合乎"用户"期待,是评估司法质量优劣的核心标准。在比较法上,各国优化审判质量的模式主要包括四类:程序型、管治型、管理型以及结构型。自三中全会、四中全会以来,一系列蕴含司法管理目标的改革举措已在各试点单位试行,并已取得了相当的成果。但决策层对司法管理体系的整体目标和方法设定缺乏理论的系统性与自觉性,并未在学理的高度上意识到司法管理与审判权的公正运行存在紧密的关系,这无疑为理论界及实务界提供了全新的命题。
[Abstract]:Empirical data show that trial justice in China is far from meeting public expectations. For the fair operation of judicial power, the traditional academic research is mainly based on the internal perspective, focusing on the "relative self-adjustment" within the judicial power system and neglecting the perfection and development of the judicial system under the continuous promotion of external forces. And easy to fall into the theory of "circular argument." From the external perspective of judicial management, judicial trial is the process of producing "judgment" by the court. Whether the judgment quality accords with the expectation of "user" is the core standard to evaluate the judicial quality. In comparative law, there are four kinds of models to optimize trial quality: procedure, governance, management and structure. Since the third Plenary session and the fourth Plenary session, a series of reform measures containing the goal of judicial management have been tried out in various pilot units, and considerable achievements have been made. However, the decision-makers lack the system and consciousness of theory to set the whole goal and method of the judicial management system, and do not realize that there is a close relationship between the judicial management and the fair operation of the judicial power. This undoubtedly provides a new proposition for the theorists and practitioners.
【作者单位】：教育部、财政部"2011计划"司法文明协同创新中心;中国政法大学证据科学教育部重点实验室;
【基金】：重庆市高级人民法院2015年度重点调研课题“法官员额及法院人员分类制度研究”(项目号:cqfykt201503;主持人:重庆市梁平县人民法院院长石溅泉)阶段性成果
【分类号】：D926

【相似文献】