中国律师职业的边缘化问题

【作者】 刘卫星；

【导师】 苗连营；

【作者基本信息】 郑州大学 ， 法律， 2004， 硕士

【摘要】 律师职业是现代法治环境下，拥有特定法学教育气质并以此为生存手段，以保障权利为执业动机和归宿，以制约或平衡司法权和其它权力为工作机制，以实现或促进社会的公平、正义为价值取向的一个社会中立、独立人群。律师职业的主要特征体现在三个层次：一、经济上自立，运用法律知识和技能获取得报酬。二、自主表达专业意见，拥有独立人格。三、拥有成熟的特殊的职业论理观念，与社会主流意识保持良好互动关系。中国律师职业化的现状评价是：经济层次已经达到，第二层次正在接近，融入主流社会这一层次才刚刚开始，未来尚属未知数。以第三个层次的标准来衡量，中国律师职业呈现明显的边缘化态势。 笔者认为，律师职业的边缘化是指律师职业在从事法律服务及相关的职业活动中，与主体社会建构和主流社会意识，保持既非常迫近又不被接纳或难以融入而存在隔阂的一种态势。律师职业边缘化问题表现在诸多方面：政治上参政、议政的机会极少，没有形成政治力量或社团力量，体制上被排斥在官员和司法官员之外(律师只能做律师)，法律服务没有介入主流的经济活动，在企业兼并、收购、改制中少有作为；司法体制框架内受歧视、轻视及打压(立法司法实践中例子颇多)，作为准产业受到市场监管者歧视待遇(税费畸重)，特有的职业伦理不能得到广泛的社会认同(如忠实、保守秘密)等等，不一而足。 中国律师职业的边缘化现状，有其深刻的经济、政治、文化、传统、历史、制度等因素。重农抑商的经济传统和市场经济制度的缺陷未能为中介组织提供应有的发展空间；中国律师(包括古代讼师)长期处于官僚、知识分子、商人三角边缘的灰色人群；政治活动不容许社会中间力量存在或强大；没有经历现代民主、法治思想的启蒙运动，法律意识、权利意识淡薄；长期存在鄙视、打击讼师、讼棍的司法专横传统；近代以来中国长期处于社会动荡、战乱纷仍的历史环境，缺乏以法治国的和平条件;司法体制在权利保障方面存在严重缺陷;就律师业自身而言，存在律师政治家理想的缺失，法律素养的明显不足，职业道德的模糊和淡化以及管理体制的僵化、滞后等因素。充分认识律师职业边缘化的诸多成因，为解决此问题奠定良好的决策基础。 解决中国律师职业边缘化的问题，我们无法像英美法系那样拥有特殊的传统和现实优势，我们甚至无法在短时间达到典型大陆法系国家律师职业化程度的条件，我们既要着眼民主与法治的未来，又不能忽视中国的传统和现实，在应然与实然之间，寻求中国律师职业化建设先进性、科学性和可行性的最大化。 中国律师业在未来发展的路上究竟能走多远，能否从根本上扭转律师职业的边缘化困境，关键在于我国民主与法制环境的构建状况。基于此，笔者认为，中国的律师制度构建应当走政府推进型与社会推进型相结合的道路，以政府推进法制的改革为主导，辅之以社会、民间自然生成的具有现代法治精神的制度、规范和力量。离开前者，仅仅仍靠社会法律生活中习惯、惯例和传统的磨合和实践经验的积累来促进律师制度建构，将会迟滞这一过程的尽早实现，而且自然的磨合和积累可能会产生无目标、无序化或多向目标的冲突，将会使律师制度建构过程无端浪费、消耗更多的资源和成本。离开后者，把律师制度安排现仅仅说成依靠政府的法制发展战略的框架设计，将会忽略民众特别是法律职业人在律师制度建构过程中的首创精神。这样的律师制度设计，无论怎样填密周详，都将丧失其坚实的社会基础。 中国律师职业的主流化过程，就是中国社会的法治化过程。法治化社会不仅仅是造福律师职业，而且更为所有的社会主体带来福扯。需要强调的是:法治尚未建成，律师更需努力。更多还原

【Abstract】 Lawyer in the environment of modern legal system is a neutral and independent group; it has the quality of professional law education and makes a living relying on the quality, regards rights security as its working motive and goal, the restriction or balance upon jurisdiction and other powers as its working mechanism and the realization or promotion of the social equity and justice as its value orientation. The main characters of lawyer can be stated in 3 levels: (1). Economically independent, obtaining returns by the use of law knowledge and skills; (2). Freely expressing professional opinions, independent in personality; (3): Having matured special professional ethical conception, keeping good relationship with social mainstream ideology. The comments on the actuality of professionalization of Chinese lawyer are as follows: The economic level has been reached; the second level is approaching, the integration with the mainstream society is just beginning with unknown future development; Chinese lawyer is obviously marginalized if measured in the standard of the 3rd level.In the author’s opinion, the marginalization refers to a status of estrangement, where the lawyer practitioners find it easy to be approached but hard to be absorbed or integrated in the mainstream social structure and social ideology when they engages in the law service and relevant professional activities. This status is reflected in various aspects: few chances to take part in or make comments on politics, no power to organize a political party or a political community, excluded from the opportunity to become governmental officials or judicial officers (in Chinese system there is no example for a lawyer to perform another social role such as a public official), law service is not engaged in economic activities and has played little role in corporate merger, acquisition, and system reform; the lawyer is looked down upon and oppressed (especially many examples in legal and judicial practices), the lawyer industry, as a quasi-industry, is discriminated by market regulator (it bears too many taxes and fees), and its special professional ethics are not generally accepted by the society (such as in fidelity and confidentiality) and so on, which cannot be listed one by one here.The marginalization of Chinese lawyer can find profound sources in economy, politics, culture, tradition, history and system, etc. Economic tradition of valuing agriculture and controlling business and the defects of market economic system can not provide space for various go-betweens; Chinese lawyer (including ancient legal pettifogger) is defined unclearly among bureaucrat, intellectual and businessperson; political movements are denied existence or expansion of neutral power in the society; Chinese legalization doesn’t experience renaissance of modern democracy or the idea of rule by law, so Chinese public has indifferentlaw and rights senses; it has existed for a long time for Chinese tradition of judicial autocracy to look down on, crack down on lawyers and legal pettifoggers; in recent period, China was in social turmoil and ceaseless wars for a long time, so the peace condition was not enough to govern a country by law; judicial system has great defects in rights security; as to the lawyer as a career, it lacks politician’s ambition and lacks law acculturation, moreover, it has unclear and weakened professional ethics, stereotyped and backward system of management, etc. It’s imperative to fully realize every reason underlying the lawyer marginalization so as to form a solid strategy basis for possible solutions.To solve the problem, we cannot follow on the special tradition and actual advantage of Anglo-American law system, we cannot even realize this career-lawyer as professionalized as in continental law system in a short time, however, we have to envision the future of optimized formation of advancement, scientificalness and feasibility of Chinese lawyer between the ideal and reality.How long will Chinese lawyer follow on the path of future development?更多还原