论司法积极主义
发布时间：2019-01-08 16:50
【摘要】：面对中国社会转型前后的社会结构阶层变化发展趋势,以及相应的利益多元化格局,社会矛盾纠纷不断涌现的现状,法院难以满足日益高涨的司法需求,在这样的司法国情下,2009年最高院提出了“能动司法”的概念,但对这一词的源起进行追述,总结出“能动司法”有其特定的语境和语义,在我国适宜用“积极司法”置换“能动司法”,既能避免理论讨论上的纠结,也表达出同样的司法主张,在达到解决社会纠纷,推动社会进步、实现社会主流价值目的的同时,采用多边主义的积极司法又对司法能力建设以及充分发挥司法功能维护社会秩序实现公平正义有着非常重要的现实意义和理论价值。
[Abstract]:In the face of the changing trend of social structure and stratum before and after the social transformation in China, and the corresponding pluralistic pattern of interests, the social contradictions and disputes are constantly emerging, the courts are unable to meet the increasing judicial demand. Under such judicial conditions, In 2009, the Supreme Court put forward the concept of "active justice", but tracing the origin of the word, concluded that "active justice" has its specific context and semantics, and it is appropriate to replace "active justice" with "active justice" in our country. It can not only avoid the entanglement in the theoretical discussion, but also express the same judicial claims, while achieving the purpose of resolving social disputes, promoting social progress and realizing the mainstream values of society. The adoption of multilateralism has important practical significance and theoretical value for judicial capacity building and the full exertion of judicial function to maintain social order and realize fairness and justice.
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D926
本文编号：2404868
[Abstract]:In the face of the changing trend of social structure and stratum before and after the social transformation in China, and the corresponding pluralistic pattern of interests, the social contradictions and disputes are constantly emerging, the courts are unable to meet the increasing judicial demand. Under such judicial conditions, In 2009, the Supreme Court put forward the concept of "active justice", but tracing the origin of the word, concluded that "active justice" has its specific context and semantics, and it is appropriate to replace "active justice" with "active justice" in our country. It can not only avoid the entanglement in the theoretical discussion, but also express the same judicial claims, while achieving the purpose of resolving social disputes, promoting social progress and realizing the mainstream values of society. The adoption of multilateralism has important practical significance and theoretical value for judicial capacity building and the full exertion of judicial function to maintain social order and realize fairness and justice.
【学位授予单位】：苏州大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D926
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前7条
1 顾培东;;司法能动主义的蕴含[J];法律适用;2010年Z1期
2 ;最高人民法院关于印发《人民法院五年改革纲要》的通知[J];中华人民共和国最高人民法院公报;1999年06期
3 陈卫东;我国检察权的反思与重构——以公诉权为核心的分析[J];法学研究;2002年02期
4 吴英姿;;司法的限度:在司法能动与司法克制之间[J];法学研究;2009年05期
5 项振华;美国司法价值观的新发展——评“辩诉交易”[J];中外法学;1996年02期
6 孙笑侠;;公案及其背景——透视转型期司法中的民意[J];浙江社会科学;2010年03期
7 董玉庭;于逸生;;司法语境下的法律人思维[J];中国社会科学;2008年05期
，本文编号：2404868
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/gongjianfalunwen/2404868.html
