【作者】 张翅；

【导师】 张晋藩；

【作者基本信息】 中国政法大学 ， 法律史， 2009， 博士

【副题名】清代上控制度研究

【摘要】 上控是清代很有影响力的重要语词,一个关键的法律术语。清代是中国古代法制最为完善和成熟的朝代,在承袭前代的基础上,清代形成了独具特色的诉讼程序和制度,上控制度是其中重要的一种。本文认为,清代上控制度的形式完备,从地方到中央,可分为地方上控、京控、叩阍三种形式。其中,地方上控又包括府控、道控、司控和院控。按照清代律例有关上控之规定,当事人或其亲属如认为州县初审审理失当,应逐级上控于府、道、司、院,直至京控、叩阍,以使案件得以重新审理,并因此获得案件改判或纠正错判的机会。在任何社会类型的诉讼中,只有司法审判公正持平,才能真正符合统治阶级的根本利益,因此有必要建立一定的诉讼程序和制度。本文关注了中国固有的诉讼制度与诉讼实践,研究了清代上控制度的历史特点、生成动因、运行机制、社会功能及其表达与实践,在肯定清代法制注重追求实体公正这一司法活动重要目的之一的同时,客观分析了清代在诉讼程序法制方面的合理建构。与此同时,本文关注了“冤抑”这一在中国传统司法中常见的表达话语。指出清代社会以诉讼为主的法律手段成为解决冤抑的根本途径,其中上控制度发挥着尤为重要的作用。首先,我们横向地比较了清代社会同一时期多种冤抑解决方式,并纵向地寻绎了上控制度的历史演进过程。在此,本文关注了冤抑产生之后如何解决的问题,分别探讨了复仇、械斗等私力救济方式,冥判、神判、自杀、调处等自力救济方式,并与作为公力救济的诉讼进行了比较。通过比较我们认为,诉讼是解决冤抑的根本途径,在诸多解决冤抑的方式中,其形式效力最为明显,也最为规范,其中尤以上控最为有效。其次,本文借用“行动者”这一概念来定义位于清代诉讼网络各个节点上的社会主体。清代社会诉讼案件数量上的逐渐增多、民众法律意识的提高都表明了清代社会的诉讼风气不同于以往,在清代社会构建的庞大诉讼网络中,所有网络节点上的行动者,包括最高统治者皇帝、各级官员、吏役、刑名幕友、讼师、民众等不同的诉讼参与者或曰不同的行动者之间利益追求的博弈性互动,最终促成了上控制度的启动。再次,本文对清代上控法律规制与实施的探讨,主要围绕上控案件的提起与受理、案件的审理与裁判等方面展开,并在此基础上客观分析了清代上控制度作为诉讼程序法制的合理构造。对于上控案件,司法机关可以亲提审问,也可以委员查审,还可以发交所属其他下级机关审理。律例中分述了督抚亲审、司道亲审以及控经督抚者,发司道审办,控经司道者,发知府或邻近府州县审办,控经知府知州者,亲提审问等情况。作为上控制度中的非常程序,京控和叩阍也是清代上控制度的重要组成部分。两者虽都是清代民人对地方司法机关的不公审判进行上控的行为,但因呈控的地点或直接对象不同而导致惩处的差异,逐渐形成了两种不同的诉讼途径。最后,本文认为,上控制度是清代社会的“安全阀制度”,其平冤、纠错、督官、预防等功能对于维持封建统治秩序起到了一定的积极作用。对于民间冤抑的伸张提供了一种救济的渠道,对于原审判决中的错判误判现象进行了纠正,并且,对于官吏违法行为也起到了有力的监督作用,同时,对于未提起上控的案件以及未来可能出现的纷争都发挥了预防的功能。特别是在王朝政治较为清明的时期,它的积极作用相对明显。但清代上控制度的设计也具有缺乏既判力、官官相护、缠讼和诬告、司法成本增加等局限性。作为清代社会化解冤抑最为重要的一项司法救济手段,作为清代司法机关自身具有的一套内部监督体系的重要组成部分,上控制度的实行,对于处于封建末期的清代社会秩序的稳定和社会矛盾的缓和发挥了重要的作用。然而,在缺乏多元权力竞争的清代社会,上控制度的设计无疑是以服务于王朝的统治秩序为最高宗旨。由于奉行高度专制的中央集权制度,清代社会存在着很多无法根除的体制性痼疾,这在一定程度上削弱了上控制度在司法实践中的效力。更多还原

【Abstract】 The Appeals, as a critical legal term, had a strong influence in Qing dynasty.The Qing dynasty, deemed as the dynasty with the most perfect and mature legal system in ancient China, formed its unique procedures based on the achievements of the former dynasties. Among these procedures, the Appeals occupied an important place. From the local to the central level, the Appeals could be categorized into three forms, which were Local Appeals, Capital Appeals and Kouhun. In addition, Local Appeals could be subdivided into Fukong, Daokong, Sikong and Yuankong. According to the related provisions in the statutes of Qing dynasty, if the litigants or their relatives considered the first trial on the county level inappropriate, they may appeal to the governments of a higher level grade by grade. This enabled cases to be reheard and therefore offered an opportunity for the change of original sentences or the rectification of erroneous judgments.In litigations of any form of society, the fundamental interests of the ruling class are unlikely to be well safeguarded unless the judicial trials are fair and just. As a result, it is of necessity to establish relevant litigation procedure and institution. This essay, concentrating on China’s inherent litigation procedure and practice, discusses the historical characteristics, generating causes, operating mechanisms and social functions of the Appeals in Qing dynasty, as well as its articulation and practice in detail. Confirming that the legal system in Qing dynasty had a great regard for the pursuit of substantive justice, the paper provides an objective analysis of the reasonable construction of its litigation procedure. In the meantime, much emphasis is placed on the study of such expression as“grievance”common in Chinese traditional justice. The essay also points out that legal means led by litigation had become the fundamental approach to address grievances in Qing society, and the Appeals had played a key role in it.First of all, the essay makes a horizontal comparison among a variety of methods of addressing grievances during the same period. Then, historical development of the Appeals is sought after. Concerned about how the grievances shall be addressed after its occurrence, the essay probes into different types of remedies respectively and makes a comparison. These remedies are: private remedy such as revenge and fight with weapons, consensual remedy such as judgment in the hell, ordeal, suicide and mediation, and public remedy. Through the analysis and comparison, we draw the conclusion that litigation was the fundamental way to address grievances among all the methods in Qing dynasty. It had the highest level of authority and standardization. What’s more, the Appeals was the most effective one.Secondly, the thesis adopts the conception“actor”to specify the social subject located on each node in the litigation network of Qing dynasty. In Qing society, the dramatic increase in the amount of lawsuit and the enhancement of ordinary people’s legal consciousness indicated a remarkable shift in the attitude towards litigation. In this vast litigation network built in Qing society, all the actors interacted with each other in pursuit of their own interest, including the emperor, officials, clerks and runners, legal advisors, litigants and ordinary people. This interaction consequently led to the establishment of the Appeals.Thirdly, the discussion of relevant legislation on the Appeals and its implementation in Qing dynasty mainly focuses on the elaboration of how the Appeals case shall be filed, accepted, adjudicated and decided. And this also serves as bases for an objective analysis of the construction of Appeals. With respect to Appeals cases, the judicial organs may hear them in person, or assign someone to hear them, or transfer them to the authorities at a lower level. Capital Appeals and Kouhun as two special procedures were important components of the Appeals in Qing dynasty. Both two were acts of appeal brought by ordinary people against the miscarriage of justice existing in trials conducted by local officials. Nonetheless, these acts gradually evolved into two different forms of litigation due to their discrepancy in the venue where to file an appeal or the subject before whom an appeal could be brought.Last but not the least, the essay takes the position that the Appeals served as a safety valve in Qing society. It had played a major part in the maintenance of feudal ruling order, attributed to its positive functions. To be more specific, the Appeals supplied a relief channel for the grievances to be redressed; it enabled erroneous judgments rendered in the original trials to be rectified; it imposed a strong supervision over the officials to prevent their illegal activities; at the same time, it had a positive effect on the prevention of miscarriage of justice as to cases not on appeal and disputes likely to arise. These positive effects were more evident when the government was relatively incorruptible and clean. Nevertheless, the establishment of the Appeals was subject to such limitations as lack of Res Judicata, the quagmire of“the bureaucrats protecting bureaucrats”, an upsurge in vexatious suits and false charges, and enormous increases of judicial cost.The Appeals was the most significant judicial remedy to address grievances in Qing dynasty, and an integral part of the internal supervisory system of Qing’s judiciary. Its implementation had played an essential role in the stabilization of social order and the moderation of social contradictions. However, in Qing society, deficient in the competition of pluralistic power, consolidation of feudal rule was undoubtedly the prime objective of the establishment of the Appeals. Yet, resulting from the adoption of the centralized system with a high level of autocratic, there’s a large amount of institutional malaise unable to be eliminated in Qing society, which undermined the effectiveness of the Appeals in judicial practice to some extent.更多还原