论案例指导制度在我国法律体制中的地位和作用

【作者】 李鹏；

【导师】 阿依古丽；

【作者基本信息】 中央民族大学 ， 法律， 2010， 硕士

【摘要】 在我国的法律体制中存在部门立法和立法滞后,法律之问存在漏洞、模糊、矛盾的情况下,法官在适用法律时往往因缺少一个统一的标准而可能对相类似案件做出大相径庭的判决,产生所谓的“同案不同判”现象,不但有悖于现代法治的形式正义要求,也严重影响了法院司法的权威。针对现在民众广为诟病的“同案不同判”现象,案例指导制度应运而生。案例指导制度虽然源于西方的判例制度,却与判例制度有着本质的区别。主要指的是,经过严格的程序被确认的典型案例,对今后处理同类案件具有一定的约束力,本级法院或下级法院的审判人员在处理该同类案件时,如果没有其他特殊情况,应当参照。当今两大法系呈现日渐融合的趋势,我国古代有“例以辅律”遵照判例的司法传统。2005年10月26日,最高人民法院发布了《人民法院第二个五年改革纲要(2004-2008)》,提出了50项改革任务和改革措施。其中在第13项中提出了“建立和完善案例指导制度,重视指导性案例在统一法律适用标准、指导下级法院审判工作、丰富和发展法学理论等方面的作用”。目前我国的案例指导存在许多不足：如各地对案例指导的重要性认识不足,案例指导的定位未明确,对指导性案例缺乏规范的编选程序、编选标准和发布主体,导致各地刊载的案例良莠不齐、对法律的解读不一,造成民众对司法公正产生质疑。为此,建立和完善案例指导制度,我们应借鉴判例法的有益做法,对整个制度进行通盘的考虑,明确案例指导的定位、确定案例指导制度构建的基本原则、规范指导性案例的选编程序、统一选编标准、限定发布主体、明确适用规则,以构建符合我国国情的案例指导制度。文章全文分为四个部分,第一部分通过典型的案例分析了我国在现行法律体制下建立案例指导制度的必要性和可行性；第二部分阐述了我国目前案例指导制度的现状及其存在的一些不足；第三部分着重介绍了我国案例指导制度在古代的司法基础和传统、与英美法系中判例制度的比较及两者不断融合、互相取长补短的趋势；文章的最后一个部分以现行的法律体制为出发点,立足我国国情,从案例指导的定位、发布主体、约束力、选择标准和确认程序、适用规则五个方面提出了建立较完善的案例指导制度的一些构想,从而进一步明确案例指导制度在我国法律体制中的地位和作用。更多还原

【Abstract】 In our legal system exists in legislation and the retardation, the department of the law exists between the hole, vague and conflict situations, the judge under applicable law is often the lack of a unified standards and possible to make the decision of the cases are common meal alone, the so-called "different" phenomenon, not only sentenced to deny modern the rule of law in the form of justice demands, are also seriously affected the court judicial authority. Against the people of widely different from "common meal alone to" guide system, the case where the system is the source of the western jurisprudence system, but with precedent system is essential, the main distinction that is, after a strict procedure established a typical case, in the handling similar cases is binding, the higher court or the next higher court of judges in the same case, if no other special circumstances, shall be referred to. These two major law system there is convergence of our ancient times, "an example to support" the follow precedent.2005 on October 26, the supreme people’ s court promulgated the people’s court the next five years of reform programme (2004-2008), made fifty items of reform and reform measures.one of the item 13 in a guidance to establish and improve the system and directed verdicts where there is unity of the case law applicable under the direction of higher court and judicial work, and enriched and developed the theory of law. At present our case is insufficient guidance as to many parts of the guidelines:the importance of knowledge is inadequate, cases of guidance is not clearly, for guiding the lack of the listing criteria and procedures and edited and published in all parts of the case, on legal interpretation, the good and bad are intermingled, cause people a question of judicial fairness. In establishing and perfecting the system in case we should refer to precedents of the law, good practice to the whole system of overall consideration, and a clear case, determine the direction of the case of instruction system, standardize the fundamental principle guiding the case and unified selection procedures and limited release the body and clear rules apply to build our country’s actual conditions in cases of the system.The text of the article is divided into four parts, the first part of the cases analysed by a country in the existing legal system under the guidance of the need for establishing the system; the second part of our cases on the system introduced in the judicial infrastructure and tradition, and the common law system in case of the system is continuously, and the integration of complementarity trend; the third section describes the present case the guidance of the system of the status quo and the existence of some of the inadequate.更多还原