【作者】 陈荣卓；

【导师】 唐鸣；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 中外政治制度， 2008， 博士

【副题名】2000年以来乡镇法律服务所改革研究

【摘要】 在当前农村法律服务客观需求日益增大与农村法律服务资源较为匮乏、众多农民群众对市场化的法律服务支付能力不足的矛盾十分突出的情况下,作为农村法律服务市场的主要或重要供给主体之一,并曾经在很大程度上缓解了农村法律服务供给不足矛盾的乡镇法律服务所,时下究竟是应该继续向前发展并不断完善,还是任其自生自灭而结束历史使命?要向前发展该怎么发展?方向和目标是什么?要结束历史使命该怎么结束?方法和手段是什么?等等,一系列问题亟待思考并作出回应。更进一步来看,既有研究中所持有的存在细微差别乃至大相径庭的改革思路是否符合乡镇法律服务所的生存逻辑?在现实背景下,乡镇法律服务所改革的实践与理论研究之间又是否存在脱节和背离现象?如果有,研究者应该如何摆脱既有的价值偏好或理论预设而更加注重依循历史发展路径并从改革的实践层面推进乡镇法律服务所的转型?等等,所有这些都是本文所要研究的。本文通过系统梳理乡镇法律服务所自1980年代初以来从生成、推广、辉煌、调整走到现在面临着或存或废、或发展或衰败的这一发展历程,基于农村公共服务这一视角,把乡镇法律服务所置于不同时期的制度背景下和具体的法律关系中,从制度变迁的动态过程中考察我国乡镇法律服务所的服务属性。认为:上个世纪80年代的乡镇法律服务所提供的法律服务基本上属于准公共服务的范畴;而从20世纪90年代初到90年代末,乡镇法律服务所提供的法律服务则经历了一个从农村准公共服务到农村准私人服务的演进过程;进入新世纪以来,我国部分农村地区的乡镇法律服务所提供的法律服务则开始出现了一种社区性农村公共服务的新走向。其中值得关注的是,正临世纪之交,伴随着司法部自2000年9月开始“两所分离”的全面启动以及时隔3年之后《中华人民共和国行政许可法》的正式颁布,农村乡镇法律服务所的走向一度出现了“成长的烦恼”和“发展的困境”。主要表现在:乡镇法律服务所定位在短时间内出现政策的反复性和不连续性,以及定位本身带来的难以把握性和难以操作性;乡镇法律服务工作者资格认可陷入了法律的“真空”,这一立法上的困难成为了目前制约乡镇法律服务所发展的一个重要瓶颈;而取消司法行政部门对基层法律服务所设立、变更和撤销的审批权,致使相应的管理工作无法可依,管理手段弱化,则造成乡镇法律服务所的管理出现了无序状态。由此产生一连串值得深思的问题是:为什么改革预期的那种“两所分离”迟迟不能较为理想地出现在乡村地区?是什么因素导致了脱钩改制后的乡镇法律服务所急剧地萎缩?再进一步追问,在今天中国乡村地区法制建设的现实背景下,强力推行“形式正规化”或“符号化”的脱钩改制到底又有多少正当性可言?在笔者看来,或许,转换一个角度审视,当初启动乡镇法律服务所脱钩改制的这一举措自身,就在某种程度上存有欠妥或值得反思的地方。比如:“一刀切”式地分离乡镇法律服务所与乡镇司法所的统一要求,固然满足了我国单一制国家结构对政令畅通、司法统一的基本要求,但同时,却牺牲了当下多元社会对纠纷机制、司法层次、法律服务多样性的多元需求。极少从乡镇法律服务工作者的视角来设计改革方案,甚或根本没有想过将他们当作改革主体来看待,没有调动他们必要的积极性,这也许是改革不够成功的一个重要原因。再从根本上来说,一个制度的生命力来源于社会的实际需要,乡镇法律服务所固然与生俱来就有一种对政策的极度依赖性,但乡镇法律服务所20多年来的生存和发展所展现出的旺盛生命力,本身就是对近年来接二连三出台的抑制政策的最好驳斥。即使随着城乡一体化进程的推进和多元纠纷解决机制的逐步健全,乡镇法律服务所可能终将在某一天自动退出历史舞台,但时下更为关键的事情,则是如何从农村社会的法制现状出发去推行乡镇法律服务所改革,以期给乡民带来真正的实惠和利益。基于这种反思,面对当前学界关于乡镇法律服务所何去何从的众说纷纭,应该指出,从根本上来讲,决定某种事物的或存或废,并不仅仅依赖于理论上的支持抑或反对,现实中是否有其存在的合理基础则是一个更具基础性乃至决定性的因素。因此,乡镇法律服务所取消与否并不应该承受太多的关注与评说,真正需要给予充分关注的倒是,如何根据当下农村社会的法律服务需求,建构起真正适合农村社会的法律服务供给体系,届时再来考虑是否取消乡镇法律服务所、如何将乡镇法律服务所的工作分流到农村其他法律服务机构,则更合时宜。将乡镇法律服务所定位为乡镇人民政府下属的公益性事业单位,应该说,作为一种改革方案,这本身的确不失为一种选择,但似乎有走回头路之嫌。尤其是,置身于当前地方政府为缓解乡镇财政压力而进行大规模乡镇改革的这一背景,就全国范围而言,那么现时究竟又有多少乡镇会在改革中采取这种做法,其预期实在不容乐观。希望通过修改律师法将现有的乡镇法律服务工作者纳入律师管理体制之中,单从技术层面来看,确实具有操作上的可行性,但后续的实践表明,国务院对于这一并轨的制度设计实际上已经直接给出了否定回答,以至于十届全国人大常委会第三十次会议表决通过的律师法修订案最终也没有予以采纳。而对时下正在兴起的“农村法律服务进城”这一地域拓展倾向,需要言明的是,乡镇法律服务所还是应该回到农村,立足于为当地农民提供法律服务,尤其是,随着社会主义新农村建设的全面推进,乡镇法律服务所的地位和作用将日益显现,乡镇法律服务所产生于农村,其最终的服务对象是农村,这也是乡镇法律服务所职能的真正回归。沿着上述思路,就乡镇法律服务所自脱钩改制以后的延伸改革来看,江苏省玄武区将基层法律服务所转制为律师事务所的做法顺应了社会发展的潮流,为法律服务市场的拓展和规范提供了一个可供选择的途径,但乡镇法律服务所自此以后并开始执行律师收费标准,运作方式将愈发明显地带有商业化倾向,这在某种程度上,不仅会致使乡镇法律服务所的生存基础有所削弱,而且今后广大农村地区贫困农民的底层法律需求何以得到满足更是令人堪忧。上海市徐汇区“天平街道人民调解委员会调解室”属于天平街原法律服务所向人民调解室的一种转型,它把基层法律服务与人民调解结合起来,促使人民调解工作逐步向规范化、专业化、社会化方向完善,但从推广范围来看,则未必能够在上海所有地区乃至全国都可以立即实行。一个很重要的原因就是,这种模式高度依赖地方财政。湖北省段店镇法律服务所向法律服务中心过渡的做法,突出了政府的基本公共法律服务职能,探索并建立了农村公共法律服务供给的一种新方式,但这种全新的尝试在实践中仍有待于进一步考察。从行政法的角度去观察段店镇政府与法律服务中心之间的合同关系,最为明显的缺陷就是,镇政府的行政义务偏轻,法律服务中心作为行政相对人的义务则明显偏重。因此整体而言,置身于时下乡镇法律服务所延伸改革正在兴起的这一历史进程中,改革决策者不应将视野和焦点仅仅局限在乡镇范围内以及乡镇法律服务所自身,而是既要充分把握和反思已有改革经验的成败得失,为当下的农村法律服务体制改革提供借鉴,又要在掌握全国不同地区改革探索的基础上,研究适合本农村地域特点的、充分考虑农村社会经济发展背景的改革路径和内容。值得提及的是,2007年10月28日,十届全国人大常委会第三十次会议表决通过了修订后的《中华人民共和国律师法》,以社会各界针对乡镇法律服务所的广泛争论为契机,笔者认为:《乡镇法律服务业务工作细则》、《乡镇法律服务收费管理办法》,以及在此基础制定颁布的《基层法律服务所管理办法》和《基层法律服务工作者管理办法》,都因失去了相应的合法基础而面临着或改或废的命运。面对如此窘境,司法部希望通过在新修订的律师法中规定“基层法律服务”的内容,以为国务院今后单独制定《基层法律服务管理办法》做好准备工作,从而使基层法律服务所及其法律服务工作者的存续获得合法性,但这一设想最终也未能如愿以偿。根据最新颁布的律师法规定,针对没有取得律师执业证书的人员,仅仅只是要求不得以律师名义从事法律服务业务,除法律另有规定外,不得从事诉讼代理或者辩护业务。那么,结合三大诉讼法再作进一步考虑,应该说,乡镇法律服务工作者今后以公民身份有偿代理诉讼,则在某种程度上确是找到了一定的合法生存空间。不过,一旦这种可能的合法生存空间果真在实践中运作起来,那么一系列可预与不可预的问题又将随之而来。因此,从根本上来讲,要有效解决当前乡镇法律服务所的尴尬法律地位,则必须突破现有的制度框架以寻求新的发展路径。新世纪以来,伴随着我国进入“以工促农、以城带乡”的新阶段,发展战略相应地调整为“工业反哺农业、城市支持农村”,正是在这层意义上,应该说,自此以后,乡镇法律服务所改革的动因、路径和内容都离不开“以城带乡”、“城市支持农村”这一新思路,而寻求乡镇法律服务所向农村社区非营利法律服务组织的转型路径,则或许是一种新的趋向。更多还原

【Abstract】 As for the paradox that the increasingly demand on the rural legal service and there is no hunger for rural legal service resource, together with the conflict for mass of farmer’s inability to pay for the legal service, Township Legal Service Office, as one of the major suppliers of rural legal market and once relieved the short situation, nowadays is confronted an alternative that whether to further develop and unceasingly perfect or to let it run its own course without interference and die away. A series of questions demanding prompt consideration and solution, such as: For development, what is the way out? Where is the direction and what is the goal? To end up, what is the means? And so on. In detail, do the slightly different reform ideas or even the varied-widely ones conform to the survival logic of Township Legal Service Office? In the realistic context, is there any disjunction or deviation existing in the practice and theory research on the Reform of Township Legal Service Office? If any, what is the way for researcher to emphasize historic developing route while casting away the value prejudice and theoretical presuppositions, and propel the reformation of township legal service office in a practical aspect? All above-mentioned are main problems concerned in this article.This article systematically sorts out the development history of township legal service office from its first appearance, popularization, brilliance, adjustment since 1980 to the present state of "life or death". From the view of rural public service, put the township legal service office into different system context and concrete legal relationship, reviewing the service property of township legal service office upon the dynamic course of institutional change. It is considered that: In 1980s, the legal service generally fell into the scope of quasi-public service; Throughout 1990s, the legal service provided by township legal service office underwent a process from quasi-public service to rural quasi-private service; In the new century, for legal service, a newly community-based rural public service tendency are emerging in some rural areas.Remarkably was that "growing pains" and "predicament of development" once appeared in rural township legal service office when it went deeper at the turn of the century, with the entirely initiation of "separation of two offices" by the Ministry of Judiciary in September, 2000 and the official promulgation of Administrative License Law of the People’s Republic of China three years later. There are lots of originated problems deserving deep consideration. They are: Why the "separation of two offices" expected by the reform is hesitated to ideally present in rural areas? What are the factors rendering sharp decline in township legal service office after the reorganization. Furthermore, in the realistic context of China rural area legality construction, to what degree it is legitimate to compulsorily carry out the "form-normalized" and "symbolized" reorganization.In the author’s opinion, or change a view, the initiation of reorganization of township legal service office itself, to some extent, has somewhere improper and needs reflection. For instance, to meet the requirement of separating the township legal service office and township Justice Bureau by "A cut" sacrifices the pluralistic society’s demand on the diversity of dispute resolution, judicial level and legal service. While rare contriving reform program from the township legal service workers’ point of view or even never treat them as the main body of reform or the subject, failing to bring them into a full play, which may be a reason for the inadequate effect of reform; radically, vitality of a system sources from the real desire of society. Although the township legal service office inherently shows a high dependence on the policy, vigorous vitality manifested in its survival and development for the past 20 years is a best refute to the one-after-another restraining policy come forth of later years. With the advancement of urban-rural integration and gradual improvement of diverse dispute settlement mechanism, township legal service office is prone to near its end. However, what is more crucial is to pursue the reform of township legal service office based on the existing legal conditions, in the hope of bringing about really practical or substantial benefit.Based on this reflection, with consideration to the controversial argument on the prospect of township legal service office academic circles currently, it should be fundamentally pointed out that to determine the existence and abolition of a matter not only relays on the support or opposition in theory, but also on a basic and even decisive factor that whether there is a reasonable basis for its existence. Therefore, existence and abolition of township legal service office should not be given tremendous concerning or comments, while the matter how to construct a legal service supply system greatly suitable for the rural areas shall be paid adequate attention. Then, it is more seasonable to consider whether to abolish township legal service office as well as how to distribute township legal service workers to other legal service institute. As for reform program, it could still be considered to position the township legal service office as public welfare enterprises subordinated to Township People’s Government. Nevertheless, there is somewhat lawbreaking suspension to backtract. Especially, how many townships will, throughout the whole country, adopt this measure since local governments are conducting large-scale township reform for the sake of relieving financial burden? The prospect is not so optimistic. That bringing the township legal service workers into lawyer management system through revision of the Lawyers Law is operationally feasible from the sense of technique. However, the subsequent practice indicated that negative response has been actually given to the unified system program, which results in the revision of the Lawyers Law voted through the Thirtieth Session of the Tenth NPC has not been adopted in the end. For the currently emerging region-expanded tendency of "rural legal service goes to town", it is clear that township legal service office shall recur to the rural and find its feet in providing legal service to local farmers. Most especially, as the construction of socialist new countryside is advancing comprehensively, the status and function of township legal service office will become clear. Township legal service office, born in the rural, serves the rural, which is the real returning of function of township legal service office.Along the above route, since the successive reform after the reorganization of township legal service office, the act of transferring the basic public service office into lawyer office in Xuanwu district, Jiangsu province goes with the tide of social development, providing a optional approach for the expand and criterion of legal service market. As a result, township legal service office will exert lawyer charging standards and the operation mode embodies commercial inclination, which to some extent not only weakens the survival basis of township legal service office but also makes it anxious to meet the bottom legal demand of vast farmers in rural areas in the future. Tianping Street Public Mediation Committee Office in Xuhui district, Shanghai is a transformation from Tianping Street Legal Service Office, which integrates basic legal service and public mediation in order to make the public mediation service standardized, specialized and socialized. From a generalization point of view, it will not necessarily put into practice at once, one reason of which is that this mode highly depends on local finance. The transformation of Duandian legal service office of Hubei to legal service center underlies government’s basic public service function, an original mode to explore and construct rural public legal service supply. However, this brand-new attempt remains to be seen in the practice. In particular, when viewing the contracted relation between Duandian town government and legal service center from the standpoint of Administrative Law, the most conspicuous defect is that the administrative obligation is slight, legal service center as a administrative unit put too much obligation on workers. On the whole, in the historic course of township legal service office springing up currently, decision-makers of reform shall not limit their visual field and focus to the scope of township or the township legal service office itself but adequately master and reflect the already gain and loss of reform experience to provide reference for current system reform of rural legal service, and research reform route and content adequate for rural regional characteristic as well as sufficiently considering the background of developing rural economy and society on the basis of mastering reform exploration in different areas.It is worth mentioning that the revision of Administrative License Law of the People’s Republic of China voted through on the Thirtieth Session of the Tenth NPC on October 28, 2007. Take the chance of tremendous public controversy of township legal service office, the author believes that the four following regulations and measures are all facing the fate of amending or abolition owing to lost their corresponding base of legitimacy: Regulation on Township Legal Service Operation, Measures on Charging Management of Township Legal Service, as well as Measures on Management of Basic Legal Service and Measures on Management of Basic Legal Service Workers.Confronted such a predicament, Ministry of Judiciary expects to specify the job description of basic legal service in the newly revised Layers Law in order to make preparation for the subsequent Measures on Management of Basic Legal Service stipulated by State Council and legitimize the existence of basic legal service office and its workers. However, it indicates that actually State Council has immediately given negative response to the program in the subsequent practice. According to regulations in the latest edition of Lawyer Law, for the workers those have not obtained lawyer’s practice certificate are only required to engage in legal service without the name of lawyer, unless otherwise specified can they have the access to advocacy or defenses. Further considered from combining three old procedural laws, township legal service workers, to some extent, indeed find out a legal living room as long as they only represent case in the name of citizen or legal service worker. Nevertheless, once this possible legal living room actually operates in the practice, it is to be expected that the three parties, i.e. township legal service office, township legal service workers and the third party will reach an unspoken understanding in the aspects of authorization and charging, etc. What’s more, other local relevant personnel and institutes will facilitate and support the unspoken understanding, which may as well be called "legal cahoot".Radically, only to break through the current system framework and seek an original developing route can well solve the currently embarrassed legal status of township legal service office. Our nation has advanced into a new stage of "promote the development of agriculture with industry, bring along the development of the countryside with cities" since the coming of the new century. The development strategy correspondingly adjusts to "getting industry to support agriculture and cities to support the countryside". In this layer sense, from then on the reform of township legal service office will not deviate from the new train of thought of "bring along the development of the countryside with cities" and "cities to support the countryside", while the transformation route from township legal service office to nonprofit legal service organization of rural community is a new trend.更多还原