【作者】 张学玲；

【导师】 姚荣茂；

【作者基本信息】 西南政法大学 ， 法学理论， 2011， 硕士

【摘要】 法官自由裁量权问题一直是一个恒久弥新的问题,这是因为法官自由裁量权对于法治的实现有核心性的作用,也是司法体制中的关键性问题。赋予法官自由裁量权,并对自由裁量权进行必要的限制,已经为越来越多的国家所运用,并在不断探索最适合的运作方式。改革开放以来,我国法治建设已经取得了显著成绩,中国特色社会主义法律体系已经形成,我国实施依法治国的基本方略已经具备了坚实的基础。然而,由于我国现阶段正处于社会转型时期,疑难案件不断出现,司法腐败时有发生,这就使限制法官自由裁量权成为当下我国司法改革的重要任务。正是在这种背景下,本文立足以法官自由裁量权的一般理论和我国现实状况,重点研究我国司法实践中面临的法官自由裁量权的焦点问题。其目的是探索我国如何规制法官自由裁量权的可行路径。本文除引论和结论外共分为四个部分:第一部分:主要探讨了法官自由裁量权的基本概念、法官自由裁量权的特征、法官自由裁量权的作用。认为法官自由裁量权是受到法律制约并具有一定灵活性的客观存在的司法权,其能够起到维护司法公正、实现正义的作用。第二部分:着重论述了我国法官自由裁量权的范围和原则,在论述法官自由裁量权的范围时,笔者主要从三个角度,即,从司法裁判过程来看;从案件是否能被规制明确涵盖的情况来看;从案件涉及的法律部门来看,并分别进行了论述。在探讨原则时,笔者总结分析了理论和实践中关于原则的阐述,认为行使法官自由裁量权的原则主要包括合法性原则、合理性原则、公正性原则、公开性原则、程序正义原则。第三部分:笔者主要探讨了我国法官不当行使的表现,认为法官不当行使自由裁量权表现为三种情形,即,不行使自由裁量权;错误行使自由裁量权;滥用自由裁量权。并将成因归结为三点,即,法律自身不完备;司法体系不独立;法官整体素质不高。最后提出了确定不当行使的判断标准,即,符合理性人的理性推理;为一般理性的人所接受;具有可执行性;满足公平正义的价值标准。第四部分:首先,分析了对法官自由裁量权进行规制的必要性,即,基于人性的弱点和权力的特性,法官自由裁量权必须得到规制。其次,明确了我国对其进行规制的现实状况,即,由于缺乏明确细致的规定,我国法官自由裁量权过大。最后,结合我国司法实践提出了规制的具体路径。即从加强立法、严密司法程序、引入判例法、提高法官素质、完善人民陪审制度及法律监督等几个方面进行探讨。更多还原

【Abstract】 Judges Discretion has always been a permanent indemnity new problems, because the judge discretion to achieve the rule of law are the core, it is also the key issues in the judicial system. Give judges discretion, and discretion necessary restrictions, has used more and more countries, and continue to explore the most appropriate mode of operation. Since reform and opening, China’s legal construction has made remarkable achievements, a socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics has been formed for China to implement the basic strategy of rule of law laid a solid foundation.However, due to the present stage is in the social transition, difficult cases emerging, judicial corruption have occurred, which restricted judicial discretion to be the moment the important task of judicial reform in China. It is against this background, the paper based on the discretion of the judges and the general theory of reality, focusing on the practice of judicial discretion of the judge facing the focal point. Our aim is to explore how to regulate the discretion of the judge’s possible path.In addition to this introduction and conclusion is divided into four parts:PartⅠ: Main discretion of the judge’s basic concepts, the characteristics of judicial discretion, the role of judicial discretion. That the discretion of the judge is bound by the law and have some flexibility in the objective existence of judicial power, its ability to play the interests of justice, the role of justice.PartⅡ: focuses on the discretion of the judge the scope and principles, in his discussion of the scope of judicial discretion, the author mainly from three angles, namely, the process from the perspective of justice; from clear whether the case can be regulated situation covered; from cases involving the legal department of view, and were discussed. Explore the principles, the author summarizes and analyzes the theory and practice on principle, to the exercise of judicial discretion that the principle includes the principle of legality, rationality principle, the principle of fairness, openness principle, the principle of procedural justice.PartⅢ: The author focuses on the improper exercise of the performance of judges, that judges the performance of improper exercise of discretion for the three cases, that is, not to exercise discretion; wrong exercise of discretion; abuse of discretion.Will boil down to three causes, namely, the law itself is not complete; justice system is not independent; judge the overall quality is not high. Finally, improper exercise of the judge to determine the standard, that is, in line with rational reasoning rational man; as accepted by the general rational person; enforceable; meet the values of fairness and justice.PartⅣ: First, it analyzes the discretion of judges to the need for regulation, that is, the weaknesses of human nature and power based on the characteristics of judicial discretion must be regulated. Second, the clear regulation of the reality of its situation, that is, the lack of a clear and detailed requirements, our judges have too much discretion.Finally, the judicial practice of China put forward specific regulatory path. From strengthening legislation and strict judicial procedures, the introduction of case law, improve the quality of judges, improve the people’s jury system and the legal supervision of several aspects.更多还原