發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-01-26 21:35

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 司法公信力 法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解 法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解 法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解機(jī)制　出處：《上海大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：作為法治社會(huì)的一個(gè)重要標(biāo)志，司法公信力的程度越高,司法的職能和作用越能很好地實(shí)現(xiàn)。黨的十八大報(bào)告中出現(xiàn)了許多關(guān)于司法、法治的關(guān)鍵詞眼，可謂通篇都充滿了濃厚的法治元素，并且第一次提到了加強(qiáng)司法公信建設(shè)。但現(xiàn)實(shí)是司法效率的低下、司法人員的行為失范以及個(gè)案審理的不公，使得人們對(duì)司法充滿了失望與不滿。法律喪失了本該有的權(quán)威，人們遇到糾紛的時(shí)候不愿再尋求司法的裁決，這種后果將不堪設(shè)想。作為捍衛(wèi)社會(huì)正義最后關(guān)卡的司法機(jī)關(guān)與法官，更要具有較高的公信力�？梢�(jiàn)，維護(hù)司法權(quán)威，提高司法公信力，樹(shù)立公眾的法律信仰是一項(xiàng)刻不容緩的重要任務(wù)。 目前我國(guó)正處于社會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)型的重要時(shí)期，調(diào)解作為我國(guó)民事訴訟中一項(xiàng)重要制度，對(duì)于及時(shí)有效化解矛盾糾紛，節(jié)約司法資源，，促進(jìn)司法和諧發(fā)揮著積極作用。然而，在“調(diào)解優(yōu)先、調(diào)判結(jié)合”的政策引導(dǎo)下，法院調(diào)解制度正經(jīng)歷著一場(chǎng)復(fù)興運(yùn)動(dòng)，“以判壓調(diào)”“以騙誘調(diào)”“久調(diào)不決”等不當(dāng)調(diào)解行為亂相環(huán)生，催生法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解問(wèn)題的出現(xiàn)。當(dāng)越來(lái)越多的調(diào)解案件進(jìn)入強(qiáng)制執(zhí)行程序后，調(diào)解的案件同樣面臨了“執(zhí)行難”問(wèn)題，這對(duì)于司法公信力的提升是十分不利的。面對(duì)這一問(wèn)題，糾正法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解的不當(dāng)調(diào)解行為，督促法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解時(shí)建設(shè)司法公信力的必由之路。由于現(xiàn)有制度對(duì)法官調(diào)解行為的監(jiān)督約束并不清晰完善，因此，構(gòu)建有效的法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解機(jī)制對(duì)于司法公信力的提升具有不可忽視的現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。 本論文包括引言、正文以及結(jié)語(yǔ)，正文部分包括四章內(nèi)容。 第一章主要包括司法公信力的基礎(chǔ)問(wèn)題和法院調(diào)解制度兩部分內(nèi)容。在對(duì)司法公信力的概念及現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行闡述后，探討了法院調(diào)解對(duì)司法公信力的積極作用，并指出目前我國(guó)法院調(diào)解制度中存在法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解的問(wèn)題，正危害著司法公信力的建設(shè)，值得重視和研究。 第二章中筆者對(duì)法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解問(wèn)題進(jìn)行了全方面深刻的剖析與探討。首先是用了比較分析的方法對(duì)法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解的概念進(jìn)行界定。接著列舉了法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解在現(xiàn)實(shí)中的幾種表現(xiàn)形式，更加形象地對(duì)法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解現(xiàn)象進(jìn)行詮釋，從中發(fā)現(xiàn)了其隱蔽性極強(qiáng)的特征。進(jìn)而還從法官的心理角度分析其強(qiáng)制調(diào)解的行為原因，即在大調(diào)解政策的引導(dǎo)下產(chǎn)生的省事功利心理。最后討論了現(xiàn)有的針對(duì)法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解的約束機(jī)制存在一定缺陷，可以說(shuō)約束效果軟弱無(wú)力。 第三章基于前兩章的研究，將誠(chéng)信作為聯(lián)接司法公信力與法官調(diào)解行為的關(guān)鍵點(diǎn)，提出法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解的創(chuàng)新概念，在誠(chéng)信理論的研究成果上對(duì)其進(jìn)行充分闡釋，對(duì)法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解的內(nèi)涵、基本要求及評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行了理論探索。最后進(jìn)一步分析了法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解與司法公信力的關(guān)系，提出法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解有利于司法公信力提升的觀點(diǎn)。 第四章是本文創(chuàng)作的重點(diǎn)內(nèi)容，也是創(chuàng)新研究，即依據(jù)法官調(diào)解行為的特質(zhì)設(shè)計(jì)構(gòu)建最優(yōu)的法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解機(jī)制。由于法官?gòu)?qiáng)制調(diào)解具有極強(qiáng)的隱蔽性，這與法官的心理因素有密不可分的關(guān)系，因此本文要建立的法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解機(jī)制是以激勵(lì)手段為主的誠(chéng)信機(jī)制。筆者運(yùn)用經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)中的委托代理理論詳細(xì)剖析法官調(diào)解中的行為選擇過(guò)程，并從管理制度、信用體系、司法環(huán)境、法律保障四個(gè)方面，提出法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解機(jī)制的構(gòu)建路徑，引導(dǎo)法官做出與當(dāng)事人利益一致的行為選擇，即誠(chéng)信調(diào)解。構(gòu)建法官誠(chéng)信調(diào)解機(jī)制不僅可以規(guī)范法官調(diào)解行為、培養(yǎng)法官誠(chéng)信意識(shí)、營(yíng)造司法公信環(huán)境，而且對(duì)于提升司法公信力具有實(shí)踐意義。
[Abstract]:As an important symbol of the rule of law, the higher the degree of credibility of the judiciary, the judicial function can well realize the. Eighteen big reports of the party appeared many about justice, the rule of law is full of keywords eyes are full of strong legal elements, and the first mention of the strengthening of judicial public trust construction. But the reality is that the low judicial efficiency, judicial misconduct and case of injustice, makes people full of disappointment and dissatisfaction of judicial law. The loss of some of the authority, when people encounter disputes to seek judicial ruling, the consequences will be unbearable to contemplate. As the judicial organ and judge to defend the last level of social justice, but also to have a high credibility. Therefore, safeguard judicial authority, improve judicial credibility, establish the legal faith of the public is an urgent important task.
At present, China is in an important period of social transformation, China's civil litigation mediation as an important system, timely and effective to resolve disputes, save the judicial resources and judicial harmony plays a positive role in promoting. However, "mediation priority, combined with" the transfersub policy under the guidance of the court mediation system is experiencing a Renaissance, "to the press" "seduced" long tune "decision" improper mediation behavior chaos Huansheng stimulate the judge forced mediation, the problem. When more and more mediation cases after entering the enforcement procedure, mediation cases also faced the problem of "difficult to execute", this it is very unfavorable for enhancing the credibility of the judiciary. Facing this problem, improper behavior correct judge mandatory mediation mediation, the judge mediation construction good faith the only way which must be passed to the judicial credibility. Because the current system of law The supervision and restraint of official mediation is not clear and perfect. Therefore, building effective judge mediation mechanism is of great significance for enhancing the credibility of judiciary.
This paper includes the introduction, the main body and the conclusion, and the body part includes four chapters.
The first chapter mainly includes the basic problems of the judicial credibility and the court mediation system two parts elaborated the concept and present situation of the credibility of the judiciary, discusses the positive role of court mediation of judicial credibility, and it is pointed out that the court mediation system of our country exists in the law officer compulsory mediation problem is endangering the construction of judicial credibility that worthy of attention and study.
In the second chapter, the author probes into the profound analysis of all aspects of the problem. The first is the mandatory mediation with the method of comparative analysis to define the concept of compulsory mediation. Judge then lists several manifestations of compulsory mediation judge in reality, more vividly to judge compulsory mediation phenomenon of interpretation, from discovery the characteristics of the strong concealment. And also from the psychological angle analysis the behavior of compulsory mediation, the mediation in the policy under the guidance of the easy utilitarian psychology. Finally it discusses the existing constraint mechanism for the judge mediation has some defects, can be said that the constraint effect of weak and feeble.
The third chapter is based on the study of the first two chapters, the key points of integrity as the joint of the credibility of the judiciary and judicial mediation behavior, the concept of innovation integrity judge mediation, the full interpretation of the research results on the theory of integrity, the integrity of the connotation of the judge mediation, explored the theory and basic requirements of evaluation criteria. Finally, further analysis the relationship between the integrity of judges mediation and judicial credibility, integrity puts forward the judge mediation is conducive to the improvement of the judicial credibility point of view.
The fourth chapter is the focus of this creation, but also innovation research, which is based on the characteristics of the behavior of constructing optimal design of mediation judge integrity mediation mechanism. Because the judge forced mediation has strong concealment, there is a close relationship between the psychological factors and the judge, because of this paper to establish the integrity of the judge mediation mechanism is integrity mechanism with the incentive way. The author uses the principal-agent theory to detailed analysis of judicial mediation in economics in the selection process, and from the management system, credit system, legal environment, legal protection four aspects, put forward the construction of the judge mediation mechanism to guide the path of integrity, consistent with the interests of the parties to the judge's behavior choice, namely integrity the establishment of judicial mediation. Honesty mediation mechanism can not only standardize mediation of the judge, the judge to cultivate awareness of integrity, to create public confidence in the judicial environment, and to improve The credibility of the judiciary is of practical significance.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：上海大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D926.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 劉韻清;周曉陽(yáng);;論中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)誠(chéng)信文化[J];船山學(xué)刊;2009年01期

2 李浩;論法院調(diào)解中程序法與實(shí)體法約束的雙重軟化──兼析民事訴訟中偏重調(diào)解與嚴(yán)肅執(zhí)法的矛盾[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;1996年04期

3 孔奕雯;;法院調(diào)解中的程序真空——談法院調(diào)解中法官角色的偏差[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年20期

4 王學(xué)成;;論良好司法公信力的價(jià)值功能及其實(shí)現(xiàn)路徑[J];廣東廣播電視大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2010年03期

5 徐雅芬;誠(chéng)信的內(nèi)涵和機(jī)制的建立[J];思想理論教育導(dǎo)刊;2003年08期

6 鄭軍;歐陽(yáng)波;;法官誠(chéng)信——司法公信力的根基[J];黨史文苑;2006年16期

7 李淑麗;;對(duì)我國(guó)誠(chéng)信歷史及現(xiàn)狀的探析[J];才智;2009年31期

8 陳朝陽(yáng);;中國(guó)司法能動(dòng)性邏輯假設(shè)的破解：法官之誠(chéng)信訴訟[J];華東政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年06期

9 范愉;;調(diào)解年與調(diào)解運(yùn)動(dòng)[J];河南社會(huì)科學(xué);2010年01期

10 劉坤;;強(qiáng)制調(diào)解理論探析[J];河南商業(yè)高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2011年01期

本文編號(hào)：1466655