从程序异化到事实异化：以冤案为中心

【作者】 王永杰；

【导师】 谢佑平；

【作者基本信息】 复旦大学 ， 诉讼法， 2007， 博士

【摘要】 当前,我国面临着构建社会主义和谐社会、通过程序实现法治的重要任务。但是,我国的司法程序却同时暴露出“有法不依”和“无法可依”这一二律悖反现象。前者表现为法律实施缺乏权威、程序违法缺乏制裁;后者表现为法律不够完善、程序不够完整,背后是程序异化下的司法潜规则盛行,这在刑事司法中表现得尤为明显。这些潜规则很难随着法律修改而根本消除,甚至会具有更强的免疫力,其危害也更为直接和严重,因此,需要充分关注这一问题。与之相关的冤案问题,不仅是一个国内的司法难题,更是人类的司法难题;不仅是一个法律问题,更是一个政治问题。研究这些问题有助于减少冤案、维护法律实施、促进司法和谐、构建和谐社会。本文以冤案的产生(事实异化)与程序违法和缺陷(程序异化)的关系为主线,运用法社会学的观点和方法,对冤案的内在机理、抑制冤案发生的程序制度设计、程序异化如何回归价值本位等问题进行研究。本文的创新之处,表现为理论和方法两个方面。理论创新主要在于以法社会学为理论背景,着眼于冤案的社会结构,从程序异化—事实异化这一主线入手,研究冤案的运行机理及其与程序异化—事实异化的辩证关系,以冤案为视角论述程序正义的必要性与改造途径,程序对于法官职业化、法官中立的刺激作用,诉讼模式的闭合性与开放性,证据规则与自由心证、证据裁判之关系,二审救济功能的改造等;同时引入和创造了若干重要的新概念:借鉴“异化理论”和“程序异化”,提出“事实异化”的概念;引入自然化认识论这一证据法的认识论,对实事求是的认识论进行法学视野下的反思;借鉴“案件的社会结构”理论,提出“冤案的社会结构”、“致冤的社会结构”、“伸冤的社会结构”、“伸冤话语权”、“冤案的免疫机制”和“冤案的自我恢复机制”等概念,运用系统论提出“刑事司法系统论”、“刑事司法和谐论”等概念。方法创新表现为规范研究与实证研究相结合。通过收集关于冤案的原始资料(对冤案发生地的司法部门、当事人和律师进行访谈,查阅历史上冤案的档案资料等),进行实证研究,同时结合法学规范研究,论述宪法与刑事司法互动,实体法与程序法的契合,国内法与国际法的衔接等重要问题。总之,以程序异化—事实异化的范式为主线,以冤案为样本,以案件的社会结构为切入点,运用法社会学的理论和方法来研究冤案所折射的异化本质,具有某种开拓性和创新性。更多还原

【Abstract】 China undertakes an important task at present, that is, to realize rule by law through procedure. However, both "there are laws but little observation of them" and "there are no laws to apply" exist in judicial procedures in China. The former often displays in no authoritativeness of law and no sanction of procedure. The latter usually manifests in imperfection of law and incompleteness of procedure. Because procedure is alienated, latent rules are very popular, especially in criminal judiciary. It’s very difficult to eliminate these latent rules because they may have strong immunity. So we must put more emphasis on these latent rules.Unjust cases related to this topic are not only a judicial poser in China but also a judicial poser in the world, not only a legal problem but also a political problem. To have a research on these problems is conductive to reduce unjust cases and ensure law implementation. This thesis centers on produce of unjust cases and illegality and drawbacks of procedure from the perspective of law sociology, analyzing inner mechanism of unjust case and designing procedures which could reduce and restrain unjust cases. In this way, the alienation of procedure could return its original value.This thesis makes both theoretical and methodological innovations. In theory, by focusing on social structure of unjust cases, it analyzes mechanism of unjust cases and relationships between alienation of procedure and alienation of fact. It points out that proper procedure is necessary to judge profession, judge neutrality, relationships between judgment before session and judgment in session, closure and opening of litigation, relationships among evidence rules, the doctrine of discretional evaluation of evidence and evidence judgment, and improvement of procedure remedy. This thesis also creates some new conceptions. By using Mark’s "alienation theory" for reference, it puts forward "alienation of procedure" and "alienation of fact". By drawing lessons from "social structure theory" of cases, it advances "social structure of unjust cases", "social structure of forming an injustice", "social structure of righting an injustice", "expression power of righting an injustice", "immune mechanism of unjust cases", "self-recovery mechanism of unjust cases" etc. By probing "system theory", it creates "system theory of criminal justice", "harmony theory of criminal justice" etc.In methodology, it combines norm study with positivist research. The author has made some deep interviews with litigants, lawyers and local judicial departments where unjust cases happened. Besides deep interview, the author also collected some dossier of unjust cases. Combining with norm study, this thesis probes interaction between constitution and criminal justice, agree between substantive law and procedure law, join between international law and national law etc.In brief, based on novel theory and proper method, this thesis makes an effective attempt on explanation of unjust cases.更多还原