【作者】 林毅坚；

【导师】 张榕；

【作者基本信息】 厦门大学 ， 诉讼法学， 2007， 硕士

【摘要】 法官遴选制度的改革牵涉到多种因素的变更,典型如政治体制、地区差异、经济因素、利益平衡等。本文将法学教育、司法考试、法官遴选三种制度所涉及的追求法律理性这一共同目标提炼出来,在界定理性是关于社会进步、制度进步、道德进步的社会理性的基础上,引用将法律理性区分为法律自身的理性,法律人的理性和法律教育的理性三个层次的分析,将法学教育、司法考试和法官遴选制度的完善统一于法律理性的提升上。除引言和余论外,本文分为四章。第一章首先介绍了达玛什卡教授采用了一种“独尊”政治因素来分析法律程序的“技术处理法”,点出本文意在效仿此分析方法,论述了法律理性所包含的三个层次在这三种制度上均能体现,从而论证了以法律理性为纽带对三种制度进行讨论的可行性,这也是对本论文的分析方法的交代。第二章通过对法学教育制度的纵向历史考察和横向比较,指出法学教育制度的发展是一个不断提升法学教育理性的过程,并以此为鉴,对我国的法学教育制度进行反思,指明法学教育制度的完善恰是法官遴选制度的基础架设。第三章通过对两大法系司法考试制度的概况简介及比较,归结出司法考试应具备的作用,以此裨益我国司法考试制度的改进,并同时指明,司法考试制度的改进体现了法律人的理性的要求,也为法官遴选制度的完善提供一种过程优化。第四章通过前述法律理性的界定、法学教育制度及司法考试制度的改进,水到渠成地引出法官遴选制度的确立是必要的。在对两大法系法官遴选制度的比较思考的基础上,点明我国法官遴选制度的弊端并提供了可行的改进建议。余论呼应了引言部分,点出本文“独尊”法律理性的分析模式力有不及的地方,如行政权力坐大、职业归属感淡薄法官、检察官、律师三职业间的流动不良等众多问题依然存在,尚待经过一系列程序的深化设计才可解决。本文的理论创新之处主要在于效仿达玛什卡教授的分析方法,将本来影响法官遴选制度的因素人为设置成常量与变量的关系,将政治因素、社会环境、利益权衡等视为常量,静态考察法官遴选制度不断完善的过程,并以法律理性为纽带,将法学教育、司法考试制度与法官遴选制度联结起来。更多还原

【Abstract】 The reform of the Judges’selection system involves many factors, for instance, political system, district economical level, benefit equation etc. This paper offers a new analytic method that it views the juristic reason as the commonness of the legal education, the judicial exam system and the judges’selection system. Base on the conclusion that the reason is a good change of the society, the system and the social reason, the paper quotes an trichotomy, with which the juristic reason was divided into three parts: the first one is the reason of the law itself, the second one is the reason of the legal men, the third one is the reason of the legal education. According to this trichotomy, it unifies the legal education, the legal exam system and the judges’selection system into a whole goal for the exaltation of the juristic reason.In chapter1, it points out that this paper would follow the lead of Pro. Mirjan R .Damaska’s special analyze method, views the juristic reason as the whole goal for the three systems which related to the judges’selection system and discusses the probability of this unification method.In chapter2, according to the conclusion of the historical survey and the crosswise comparison on the legal education system, it point out that the improving of the legal education system is the need for the change of the legal men’s juristic reason. Then, efficient manners also be devoted to change the limitation of the legal education system.In chapter3, according to the improvement of the judicial exam system, and after the comparison of the two kinds of legal system in the world, it realizes that to change the judicial exam system is the process optimizing of changing the judges’selection system, and the judicial exam system’s perfect also incarnates the require of the legal men’s reason.In chapter4, based on the conclusion above, it illustrates that the conditions have been prepared, and it is the right time to improve the judges’selection system. Meanwhile, it analyzes the defects of the judges’selection system in china and explains the feasibility of its melioration.Conclusions are summed up based on the analysis in former discussions. Two key things we should consider and solve beautifully: One is the independency of the justice; the other is the favor of the occupational emotion. To achieve this it would be a long complex process. Besides, this paper has offered a new perspective on the juristic reason in order to discuss the judges’selection system more expressly, this method enriching the perspectives of the melioration on the judges’selection system.更多还原