论小额程序中的诉权保障

发布时间：2018-11-26 20:05

【摘要】：小额诉讼作为一种诉讼制度，它固有的问题和悖论及其造成的弊端虽然无法从根本上解决，，但可以通过各种途径和采用各种方法对其弊端予以抑制或消除。小额诉讼程序作为追求司法和诉讼效率的程序设置，其在诉权保障上存在悖论它主要体现为实现公正却又可能妨碍公正实现；注重效率却又可能增加成本；优化资源配置却又可能造成资源滥用。从制度自身的两面性、诉权行使中的人性自私论、司法资源分配不均的绝对性、诉权保障的复杂性这几个方面可以探讨其产生的原因。人性是自私的，人们怀着各自的目的和面对同一样事务或实物，却只能看到各自所需的利益，对于和自己利益相冲突的方面则不管不顾，这也是其他诸多诉讼程序也会产生悖论的原因。公正和效率是我国民事诉讼法所追求的两大基本价值。公正和效率相互矛盾又相辅相成。实现程序效益最大化和降低司法成本之间就是这样一个客观存在的矛盾统一体。诉权保障深陷悖论从根本上说也是公正和效率互相牵扯之结果。诉权保障问题不是一个孤立的问题，是与诉讼制度的设计、司法独立、权利意识以及法律程序等问题纠结在一起的，这就决定了其复杂性。虽然悖论会产生弊端，但弊端是可以被消除的。文章通过程序正义观念在传统文化中的缺失和小额程序现实适用状况的不理想两个方面对抑制小额程序中诉权保障悖论弊端的必要性进行分析，通过我国的司法环境现状对消除小额程序中诉权保障的弊端进行可行性分析。为了促进小额程序中诉权保障的良性发展，我们可以通过一系列措施完善小额程序中的诉权的保障，抑制或消除其悖论的弊端。文章从原则性措施和程序性措施两大方面进行了阐述，其中原则性措施有完善小额程序的独立性、注重经济发展实效性、注重地方差异性三个方面；程序性措施有赋予当事人一定的程序选择权、增加程序转换灵活性、实现再审程序便捷化三个方面。
[Abstract]:As a kind of litigation system, the inherent problems and paradoxes and the drawbacks caused by it can not be solved fundamentally, but they can be suppressed or eliminated by various ways and means. As a procedure setting for the pursuit of judicial and litigation efficiency, there is a paradox in the protection of the right of action, which is mainly reflected in the realization of justice but may hinder the realization of justice, and the emphasis on efficiency may increase the cost. Optimizing the allocation of resources may cause abuse of resources. From the dual character of the system, the private theory of human nature in the exercise of the right of action, the absoluteness of the uneven distribution of judicial resources, and the complexity of the protection of the right of action, the causes of its emergence can be discussed. Human nature is selfish, people with their own purpose and face the same affairs or things, but can only see the interests of each other, regardless of their own interests conflict with the aspects, This is also the reason why many other proceedings will produce paradoxes. Justice and efficiency are the two basic values pursued by our civil procedure law. Justice and efficiency are contradictory and complementary. Realizing the maximization of procedure benefit and reducing judicial cost is such an objective unity of contradiction. The guarantee of right of action is deeply involved in the paradox of justice and efficiency. The protection of the right of action is not an isolated issue, but intertwined with the design of litigation system, judicial independence, consciousness of right and legal procedure, which determines its complexity. Although paradoxes have drawbacks, they can be eliminated. This paper analyzes the necessity of restraining the paradox of procedural right protection from two aspects: the lack of procedural justice concept in traditional culture and the unideal state of practical application of small sum procedure. Through the current situation of judicial environment in our country, this paper analyzes the feasibility of eliminating the malpractice of the protection of the right of action in the small amount procedure. In order to promote the benign development of the protection of the right of action in the small amount procedure, we can perfect the protection of the right of action in the small amount of procedure through a series of measures, restrain or eliminate its paradoxical malpractice. The article expounds from two aspects of principle measure and procedural measure, among which the principle measure has three aspects: perfecting the independence of small amount procedure, paying attention to the actual effect of economic development and paying attention to the local difference; Procedural measures include giving the parties a certain choice of procedure, increasing the flexibility of procedure conversion, and facilitating the retrial procedure.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D925.1

【参考文献】