司法权力的监督机制研究

【作者】 刘学武；

【导师】 沈开举；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法律， 2002， 硕士

【摘要】 本文突出两大特点：一是运用比较分析的方法，对大陆法系，英美法系和我国现行司法权力进行了比较研究，在比较中找出了我国现行司法监督体制的不足。二是借鉴国外先进的司法经验，结合我国司法监督机制存在的突出问题，有针对性的大胆的提出自己的创新与观点。 本文共分为四个部分，四万余字。第一部分主要对司法权的监督内部机制存在的问题进行了深刻剖析，重点提出了(1)法官在审判活动中权责不明，责权不分。法官缺乏独立性，审判组织流于形式，长官判案现象严重，很难实现错案追究。(2)司法体制的行政化和非独立性为司法地方保护主义的滋生猖獗提供了制度性土壤。(3)我国虽然实行的是“两审终审制”但在审判实践中，一审法院，往往未审未判先向上级法院汇报，剥夺了当事人的诉讼权利。使二审流于形式，妨碍了上级法院对下级法院的真正监督难以发挥，导致了司法不公的严重后果。(4)司法队伍素质不尽人意，难以做到自我制约。难以抵御抗衡其他社会力量干扰司法，影响司法公正，难以掌握自由裁量权。(5)法官物质待遇低下，难以抵御社会的各种诱惑，从而出现了“关系案、人情案、金钱案”，造成司法不公。(6)当庭审判流于形式，当庭审而不判，实行暗箱操作，保证不了审判公开。(7)法院的设置管理体制行政化，造成人浮于事，法官信念偏离公正主题。 第二部分对司法权外部监督机制存在的问题进行了比较深刻的剖析，重点指出了 门）法律监督机关一人大监督抽象而不具体，未形成制度化、细则化，导致了权力机关对司法机关监督悬置。u）检察院对审判活动的监督却流于形式，未把监督放在首位或中心位置，把严打，反贪放在第一位，淡化了法律监督的职权和责任。门）党的监督由于领导缺乏法律专业化，造成监督不力。N）舆论监督障碍重重，不能触及较深层次，只是对现象监督，末能有效发挥。乃）人民群众诉讼当事人的监督尚未形成自觉性和责任感。律师队伍的监督，没有形成经常化、专业化，反而出现律师用非法手段引诱、腐蚀法官，从而形成司法腐败的一大诱因。 第三部分主要讲述了中国加入WTO后对司法权的冲击和影响。这部分重点分析了加入WTO后经济全球化，中国的法律必将与国际接轨，中国司法将融入世界法治环境中，将面临着前所未有的考验和挑战。法院新型案件浮出水面，法院肩起司法审查的重任。公正、高效、透明、民主的司法改革刻不容缓。加强司法的独立性和权威性是改革的关键。中国司法的改革必将经历一个漫长的过程，要追求司法公正，必将对监督机制进行大量的改革和创新。 第四部分主要研究了司法权监督机制的对策，大胆地提出了在完善对司法权自律性制约机制的变革。首先要确保司法独立原则的真正 －2． p实现，要保障司法经济独立，改革目前司法经费由地方财政拨付的状况，逐步实现司法专项拨款，由国家财政列支。摆脱地方政府干扰。要促进司法人事独立。法官任职实行严格的资格考试仟命制。其次在司法独立下提高法官的整体素质，要实行英美等国家那样法官选任制度，严格执行我国目前重新修订的《法官法入 让法官成为社会的精英。第三要确立我国法宫独立审判原则。要向西方发达国家那样对法官实现不可更换制，专职制，高薪及忧厚的福利待遇制，退休制。以保证法官在职廉洁和退休后生活无忧。要更新观点，正确处理法官独立审判与中国共产党的关系，要认识到法官独立审判不是不要党的领导。法官依照法律进行审判，就是贯彻执行党的方针政策。要充分认识法院和政府是平行关系，而不是隶属关系，以确保法官独立。要处理好和人大的关系。要取消庭长、院长审批案件的司法行政化做法，充分发挥了法官的自由裁量权，确保案件质量，要使法官独立于上级法院，理顺监督关系，防止上级法院干预下级法院办案。第四要改革审判委员会职能，发挥其作用。第五要完善陪审制度，要让陪审员参与审判来防止法官滥用权力，从而恢复宪法对人民陪审制原则规定，用专门法律对人民陪审制作详尽规定，改革现行司法制度完善诉讼规则，体现陪审制的民主精神，实现司法公正。第六要保障司法公开原则，实行“阳光审判”制度。在加强司法权的他律制约机制改革上，首先要强化人大的监督力度，实行个案监督，要制定《监督法入 使 ．3． （人大监督系统化、法制化、制度化，变抽象监督为具体监督。其次要转移检察机关监督中心，充分运用法律上赋予的权力，全面履行法律监督职责，维护公正司法。要强化民行监督，要充分认识民行监督不是干预独立审判，不会干预私权，不违反既判力原则，不会提高诉讼成本。第三要充分发挥舆论对司法监督的作用，尽快出台《新闻法入用法律手段保障新闻舆论监督权，保证记者正当的采访权，保证舆论一第四种权力的行使，促进司法公?更多还原

【Abstract】 The article has two outstanding features :the first is to applicates the loay of compare to research the common law ,America-british law, and our country’s active right of justice, From which we can find the shortage atout our active overlook of justice. Second , it refers foreign advanced erperience of justice and connecting the outstanding problem that exists in our overlook of justice. From which we bring forwand our own creative opinion boldly.The article is divided into four parts with 40 thoundand words. In the first part, it is mainly to take apert the problem that exists in heart of juris dictional overlook deeply, which point out stressly that: first, in the judgement the judge can’t distribute the vight and responsibility, and is short of creativity, so the judgement organization is stylized and the head of judge severely. It difficult to rejudge the case of wrong. Second, the prote of area is based on non-independence and administrativelism of justice system. Third , though our country practice two times final judgement. In the practice of judgement, at the first judgement, the court hands the case in the superior court without judgement so as to deprivats the right of litigant,which make the two time’s judgement is stylized and interfere the superior court overlook the junior court so as to lead the unfair justice. Fourth, the judiciary’s quality is so low that they are difficult to self-discipline and resist interruption of many bird of secial strengthes, which effect the fair of justice and it difficult to control free judgement. Fifth, the jurist’s standand of living is not in good, so they are difficult to resist all kinds of sound allarement anda lot of cases are connected with money and relations that are found in the judgemant, which lead to unfair. Sixth: the judgement is stylized, only have judgement but without result, and the judge handle the case under the shadow, which lead to judjement can’t be devidied. Seventh: the court’s maragement system is adminislratized. Which lead to the judge in their line but do nothing and their belief apart from fair.In the second part, for problems of superoisory system in ministry of justice, there is a prolonged analysis. The emphasis on : one. it is abstract not concrete of law-superoison-national people’s congress. Because it hasn’t become system and rules, there is a syspension between right dioision and judiciary division. Two the trials from people’s procuratorate are on the surface, and do not put it in the first or center place. Placing havndly-hit and oppos ing-corrupt. It decreases the right and liability of law-superlisor. There: the superision is not enough in PRA for the lack of law knowledge of leaders. Four: there are so much obstacle in public opinion that it couldn’t reach the deeper layer. But the supervision of phenomenon doesn’t play it role effectively. Five the suporsion of litigants haven’t formed self-conscious and tidbility, the superision of lawers haven’t the lawers use illegal methods to draw on the tainled judge, and it becomes a main reason for judiciary corrupt.The third part mairly tell about what affact or infcuence jurisdiction after china’s entry into the WTO , with ecoromical globalization, the law of of china should cateh up with the international. The justice of china will integrete into the judicialenvironment of the world and surface the challenges or opportunities that never encountered the new case will come out loading responsibilities. A judicial, efficient, transparent democratil justice reformation coundn’t be cancelled any mort. The key of the innovation is to enforce the indeperdence and the authority.It remains a long way for the innovation of china’s justice. To pursuit the judicialism, we should bring more innovation and reformation.The fourth part put more omphasis on the policy of the supervision system. Proposing the innovation of self-discipline encourageously. First, we should ensare the rdalization of judicial independence. Secaring the economical independence changing the更多还原