陪审制研究

【作者】 施鹏鹏；

【导师】 孙长永；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 刑事诉讼法学， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 从世界范围内看，普通民众参与司法审判(Lay Participation)的模式主要有两种：第一种是“平民法官”模式(Mode of Lay Judge)，即由非职业法官直接进行案件审理，例如英国和意大利的治安法官制度、法国的便民法官制度等等；第二种则是陪审模式(Mode of Jury)，由平民和职业法官共同参与案件审理，分工配合或协同合作并最终形成案件判决。尽管依然受到一些质疑和诟病，但现代陪审制度却早已渗入大部分国家的司法系统，并俨然已成为各国保障现代司法民主及公民权利的重要制度。近年来，大陆法系国家俄罗斯(1993年)和西班牙(1995)先后引入了传统的陪审制。这一古老的制度再次引起了学界的普遍关注。关注的原因主要有二：一方面，传统的学界普遍认为，传统的陪审制正日趋衰微，其正当性也日益受到挑战，在这一背景下，俄罗斯和西班牙的陪审制度改革却逆流而行，这究竟昭示着“伟大复兴”，抑或是“昙花一现”，值得认真推敲；另一方面，俄罗斯和西班牙作为传统的大陆法系国家，其是否可成功运作这一“舶来”制度，并是否可如十八世纪法国大革命一般在欧陆形成新的发展潮流?这也是学界普遍关注的热点。一时间，国际刑诉学界对陪审制投入极大的关注和研究。然而在中国，虽时值刑事诉讼再修改，但有关陪审制的论著却寥寥无几。而且，中国学术界对人民陪审制的研究不仅仅是“少”而已。在为数不多的学术精品中，我们还可以看到，许多学者对陪审制尤其是大陆法系国家的参审制存在严重的误解，并已开始误导中国人民陪审员制度的改革走向。正是在这一背景下，笔者将“陪审制”。作为博士论文选题。除绪论外，本博士论文共分五章。第一章为“陪审制的产生及其在世界范围内的传播”。该章从历史溯源的角度对陪审制在英国的起源及基本雏形、陪审制在英属殖民地的传播与发展以及陪审制在欧洲大陆的传播发展进行了比较详尽和深入地研究。其中，笔者对陪审制的起源之争、陪审制在各殖民地出现不同发展趋势的原因以及法国移植陪审制是否失败等重要问题有较为独特和新颖的观点。第二章至第四章则分别从价值、制度和技术等三个层面对陪审制进行了全方位的剖析。其中，第二章为“陪审制的正当依据”。笔者认为，陪审制的正当依据主要有四：即人民主权的载体、自由的守护神、达致司法真实的有效机制以及社会与司法的桥梁。笔者在该章中还对“陪审制是否为人民主权载体”的观点争论、陪审团“过分宽容”的争论以及“司法真实”与“司法资源有限性”之间的博弈等重要问题提供了较为深刻的解释。第三章为“陪审制的制度障碍”。笔者认为陪审制的主轴思想并非源自纯粹的司法理念(les idées juridiques pures)，而更多的是某种政治或社会的信条(dogme politico-social)。因此，陪审制不可避免与刑事诉讼中一些公认的基本制度或基本理念存在内在的冲突(conflits internes)或潜在的冲突(conflits potentiels)，并因而可能破坏诉讼程序的内在逻辑(logique interne)以及陪审制度的理论根基(fondement théorique)。笔者将这种现象统称为陪审制的制度障碍(blocage du systèm)。在该章中，笔者主要分析了陪审制与上诉制度的冲突以及陪审制与判决理由制度的冲突，并在这一基础上对各国所建构的制度协调模式进行了介绍、比较和评介。从目前学界的研究成果看，该章的内容极具新颖性，几乎未有学者谈及。第四章为“陪审制的技术设计”。在该章中，笔者对传统的陪审制国家如英国和美国、传统的参审制国家如法国和德国以及近期引入陪审制的俄罗斯和西班牙等各具特色的平民参与制度进行了较为深刻的比较法考察。笔者还据此对陪审制和参审制进行了相当独到的比较。除此之外，笔者还对一些具有陪审制若干技术特征、但并不属于真正民主陪审制的“特殊形式陪审制”(包括技术陪审制和特别陪审制)进行了较为简略的评价和研究，以澄清国内学界的一些错误理解。第五章为“陪审制的重构与中国刑事诉讼的改革”。在该章中，笔者对中国人民陪审制的立法现状和理论现状进行了深入的分析，指出了人民陪审制存在和改革的必要性，并详尽地介绍了陪审制改革所可能遭遇的障碍。在这一基础之上，笔者提供了两种可供实践检验的陪审制和参审制蓝本，希冀通过陪审制的改革催化中国刑事诉讼的现代化进程。“陪审制是一个极其古老的课题”，但许多重要理论问题却并未因此而获得深刻地阐释。诚如Jurion教授所言，“我们在谈及陪审制时往往将它当成无须证明的真理，仿佛是一种宪政抑或社会的教条”。福柯在《知识考古学》中自勉，“我努力使那些仅仅因其一目了然而不为人所见的东西为人们看见”，而笔者这篇论文的贡献或许是“使那些因一目了然而不为人所理解的东西为人们所理解”。更多还原

【Abstract】 There are two main patterns of lay participation in the world. The first one is the mode of lay judge, and under this mode, the cases are heard by non-professional judges directly. For instance, the system of judge of peace in England and Italy, also the judge of proximity system in France, etc. The seconde pattern is the mode of jury, which means the lay judges and the professional judges work together to hear the cases, to cooperate as well as dividing the works in the trial until the final decision have been made. Although the latter has been doubted and criticised in the history, the mode of jury has become an important system to protect the fundamental rights of citizens and to guarantee the judicial democracy in most of the countries and has penetrated into their judicial systems.In recent years, the traditionnal mode of Jury has been introduced in Russia(1993) and Spain(1995), therefore, the academy pays more attention on this old system. The reasons are as follows: on one side, according to the general opinion hold bythe academy, the conventional mode of Jury has become weaker and weaker, as well as its legitimacy. In this situation, the reforme of sytem of Jury in Russia and Spain goes against the stream. Thus, we should figure out that the reform is whether "a great revival" orjust "a flash in the pan"; on the other side, as two of the civil-law countries, could Russia and Spain handle this system successfully, and make the system be a new developping trend as once happened in the french revolution in 18th century? Because of this situation, the international criminal procedural law academy did a lot of research on the system of Jury. Nevertheless, in China, there is very few works towards the system even in the present time of modification of the criminal procedural law. We know that some scholars have misapprehended the system of jury especially the system of assessor of civil-law countries, and what’s worse is that this misapprehension is misleading the reform of people assessor system in China. Therefore, I decided to take this issue as my subject of thesis.There are five chapters in this thesis. The first chapter is about the appearance and the worldwide developpement of the system of Jury. In the perspective of history, this chapter put emphases on the origin and the rudiment of system of Jury in England, as well as the spreading and the development in British colonies and the European continent. Thereinto, the author tries to give some original and unique opinions on certain important questions of system of Jury, such as the dispute of its origin, the reasons of its diverse devolopping trend in different colonies and whether its transplantation in France a success, etc. From the second chapitre to the forth one, the author makes a comprehensive analysis towards the system of Jury in the aspect of value, institution and technique. What’s more, the second chapter aims to indicate the legitimacy of the system of Jury. According to the author, there are four main bases of its legitimacy: the embodiment of people sovereignty, the humeri of freedom, the effective institution for judicial sincerity as well as the bridge between the justice and society. In this thesis, the controversy that whether the system of Jury is embodiment of people sovereignty, the dispute the "over-mercy"of the jury, and the conflit between the "judicial sincerity" and the "1 imite of judicial resources" have all been explained by the author. The third chapter is the "institutional obstacle of the system of Jury". The author holds the view that the soul of system of Jury is not from the pure judicial opinions, but from certain polical or social credendum. Therfore, the intrinsic conflicts or potential Conflicts between the system of Jury and the basic principles of criminal procedure is inevitable, and so that, the intrinsic logic of proceeding as well as the academic basis of system of Jury woule be destroyed potentially. The author names all the problems as the obstacles of system. In this chapter, the core content is about the conflits between the system of Jury and the system of appeal, as well as the collision between the system of Jury and the institution of ratio decidendi, and hence, the author introduces and compares the concerted institution of different countries and also gives some comments on it. This view is very original and unique in present academy, almost no scholar have mentioned it. The forth chapter is the technic design of the system of Jury. In this chapter, the author did some detailed research on the countries of traditional system of Jury, such as England and America, and on the countries of assessor system, such as France and Germany; as well, on the latest lay participation system which has been introduced to Russia and Spain. Besides, the author also introduce the "system of Jury of different forms" which means the system doesn’t belong to the people Jury system but has some technical characters, including the techinical Jury and the special Jury, so as to clarify some misunderstandings in Chinese academy. The fifth chapter is the "the reconstruction of Jury and the reform of chinese criminal procedure". In this chapter, the author analyses the present legislative and academic situation of chinese people jury system, and indicates the necessity of its being and modification as well as the potential obstacles in the way of reform. On the basis, the author provides two original versions of jury and assessor in order to accelerate the modernization process of chinese criminal procedure.Doctor William Roumier has said, "The system of Jury is a very antiquated subjet" , yet lots of important questions have not been well explained. nevertheless, "we are oriented to take the system of Jury as a truth which don’t need to proved, and take it as constitutional or social doctrine". M. Foucault wrote to himself in "The Archeology of Knowledge": "I try myself to make people see what we couldn’t see just because it is always there." , and the author aims to make people understand what we couldn’t understand just because it is always there.更多还原