【作者】 吕芳；

【导师】 刘金国；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 法学理论， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 “文化”在当今中国深入人心,人们已经习惯于在各个地方和各个领域寻找文化,于是在法律科学中出现了“法律文化”。法院文化与法律文化一样,本身就是文化的一个组成部分。法院文化命题在中国出现,是从司法实务界然后再到理论界的,与司法改革的进程基本一致。对于法院文化的研究,从宏大的社会语境,逐步聚焦到法院中的人——法官,按照韦伯所说就是“试图理解性理解社会行为,并由此而对这一行为的过程和作用做出因果解释”,这恰恰是本文写作的一个主要的方法论,即社会学的方法。其次,文化本身也可以作为一种研究的进路,就像梁志平先生提出的“法律的文化解释”,本文希望用历史文化的解释方法来研究法院,研究法院中的法官。当然第三个方法,是比较的方法。这种比较包括自己传统与现代的对比,也包括与西方法院文化的比较。本文的主题是:就中国而言,司法机关,尤其是法院目前是解决社会矛盾的中心地带,这也是法院文化主体核心活动——审判所应有之意。当代法院文化构建应认识到传统法院文化的双刃性,着重塑造法院的审判为民品质,同时强化法院文化的职业化品格以及对法律信仰特质。本文认为,中国当代法院文化从形式上看是一体的,本质是由两部分构成,即传统法院文化以及文革后法院文化,后者仍然是前者的传承,同时因法院改革而具有新的形式化内容。本文具有创建性的观点在于:传统法院文化具有内在性,这种内在性决定了传统与当代法院文化的共存性,最高法院与地方法院文化的一体化。法院改革应当在尊重这种内在性前提下前行,而不能一味妄谈司法独立。本文分为六章。第一章是法院文化基本理论,在对文化、法律文化进行剖析后,引出了国外以及我国学者对于法院文化的研究现状和不同观点,并运用一个小的实证研究揭示我国法院对于法院文化的不同热衷点,并初步分析了原因。之后引入法院文化概念,本文对法院文化作广义的理解,即法院文化是以法官为主体的法院以及法院中不同个体有关法律和法院活动的看法、态度、评价等等的观念形态以及由此表现出来的行为模式,同时还包括与法院有关的制度以及器物文化的综合体,后者如法院的建筑风格、法庭的布置与法庭人员的礼仪、着装等等。第二章主要分析美国、英国、德国法院以及法国法院发展的历史和它们所具有的不同法院文化特征,认为国外法院文化尽管各有差异,但仍存在一些共同特征,即法律职业者对法律存在一种源自传统的信仰、基层司法具有民主化倾向、法官的选任与司法独立相联系、法官和法院拥有一定的立法权。这些特征有的对我们具有借鉴意义,有的则没有。第三章,对中国法院文化进行历史考察,考证传统司法的特征和清末民国法律移植与法院制度的建立,同时从根据地时期法院分析传统法院文化的另一个可能发展方向。结论是,因为解放,民国时期发展起来的具有西方法治基本要素的法院文化被带至台湾,因为文革,兼具苏联意识形态方面特色和解放区朴素司法特点的“新法院文化”也被人为断裂。传统法院文化的两个可能转向都没有成功,传统法院文化仍然主宰着我们的当代法院。第四章,恰恰因为传统法院文化的整体性,使得法院文化不可能具有超越性,而传统法院文化的内在性又规定了当代法院文化的基本脉络,传统法院文化对法院改革有支持,也有阻碍。第五章,分别以最高法院和地方法院为视角,勾画中国当代法院文化的基本面貌,即一体化。一体化凸显出最高法院在法院文化建设中的引领作用。第六章,通过审判、法院管理、法官培训、法院建筑以及法院与社会的关系各个法院文化的细节部分的分析,对比中西法院文化的实质差别以及可能的融合点,同时再一次认定中国法院文化的独特性以及发展的前景在何方。更多还原

【Abstract】 Court culture is one part of culture, just like legal culture. The topic of court culture is studied along with judicial reform in China today. There are three main methods in the dissertation. First of all, it is methodology of social science, which just like Max Webber had said that social science is to try to understand social action and to give the function and process of such action a causal interpretation. Secondly, culture will be used as a method to expound court and judge, because culture is just one kind of history so we can explain law with culture. The third one is comparison. It includes comparing Chinese traditional court culture with modern court culture, as well as comparing Chinese court culture with western countries’court culture.The main topic of this dissertation is that now in China courts in different levels are crucial state organs to resolve social disputes. Therefore, judging, as the core function of court should play important role. But traditional court culture has different understanding of judging. To establish current court culture is to take knowledge of two sides of traditional court culture, and focus on the character of judicial democracy. Besides this, there are another two characteristics of modern court culture, one is professional tendency and the other is unity. It is thought that there are two parts of current court culture in the dissertation. One is traditional court culture, another is court culture which was formed after Chinese Culture Revolution. The latter has carried forward the former. The inventive work of the paper is to find that traditional court culture has its inherent character, such feature determines the integration of court culture.The dissertation is divided into six chapters.The first chapter is about basic theories of court culture, including what is culture, what is legal culture, and the arguments on similar topics. Then the paper puts forward the definition of court culture which consists of judge’s view to law and court, and their action models inside and outside court, as well as rules, institutions, equipments, etc. relating to court.The second chapter mainly analyses and compares different court culture of United States, England, Germany and France. In the conclusion, the author sums up four similar characteristics of these four countries’court culture: firstly, the legal profession has belief on law; secondly, local courts pay much attention on judicial democracy; thirdly, the appointments and removals of judge have relationship with judicial independence; fourthly, judges have some power of legislation.The third chapter moves to Chinese traditional court culture which is formed from Oin Dynasty to the foundation of new China and Culture Revolution. From the end of Qing Dynasty to Republic of China, court culture had has a chance to change but it was ceased because new China abandoned all legal rules and institutions of Cuo mindang Government. So the traditional court culture still captures the new court.The fourth chapter mainly demonstrates the integration of traditional court culture. Such tradition influenced modern court culture, especially judicial reform. That means traditional court culture has positive and negative effects on judicial reform.The fifth chapter analyses different functions of Supreme Court including judging, political function, administrative function, judicial interpretation function, and argues that the Supreme Court play a leader role in court system of all China. Local courts have no power to have their own court culture by now.The sixth chapter summarizes and compares court culture from a global perspevtive and tries to find the future of Chinese modern court culture.更多还原