本文選題：二元司法模式　切入點(diǎn)：檢察權(quán)　出處：《中南大學(xué)》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：本文以中國(guó)化的馬克思主義法律觀為指導(dǎo),運(yùn)用政治學(xué)、憲法學(xué)、刑法學(xué)、民法學(xué)、經(jīng)濟(jì)法學(xué)、行政法學(xué)、訴訟法學(xué)多學(xué)科知識(shí),立足于中國(guó)國(guó)情,從政治理論基礎(chǔ)、文化歷史源流、司法實(shí)踐傳承和改革發(fā)展進(jìn)路等方面,闡明了人民代表大會(huì)制度下審判機(jī)關(guān)與檢察機(jī)關(guān)分享司法權(quán)的二元司法模式之科學(xué)性和合理性。從組織架構(gòu)、權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu)、運(yùn)行方式和完善路徑等方面,厘清了中國(guó)一元憲政體制下二元司法模式,與西方三權(quán)分立憲政體制下審判中心司法模式的結(jié)構(gòu)性差異；通過(guò)回應(yīng)二元司法體制質(zhì)疑的學(xué)術(shù)觀點(diǎn),在對(duì)司法權(quán)配置模式和實(shí)踐狀況進(jìn)行深入考量的基礎(chǔ)上,系統(tǒng)回答了什么是中國(guó)特色的二元司法模式,怎樣建設(shè)完善二元司法模式的問(wèn)題。 第一,中國(guó)二元司法模式的概念與基礎(chǔ)。主要闡明二元司法模式的概念與內(nèi)涵,并從馬克思列寧主義的人民主權(quán)學(xué)說(shuō)和法律監(jiān)督思想,中國(guó)特色的社會(huì)主義理論體系關(guān)于人民代表大會(huì)制度等基本理論和中國(guó)的國(guó)情基礎(chǔ)及歷史文化基礎(chǔ)等方面,論證該模式的合理性、必要性。 第二,中國(guó)二元司法模式的形成與發(fā)展。主要闡述該模式是建國(guó)初期社會(huì)主義制度的必然選擇,形成于域外借鑒,鞏固于實(shí)踐傳承,發(fā)展于改革開(kāi)放,并對(duì)這一過(guò)程中有關(guān)審檢并列司法體制和檢察權(quán)的屬性等學(xué)術(shù)爭(zhēng)論進(jìn)行梳理和回應(yīng)。 第三,中國(guó)二元司法模式的組織架構(gòu)。從二元司法架構(gòu)的域比較入手,揭示中西司法不同的憲政定位和中西司法機(jī)關(guān)概念與內(nèi)涵的差異。從審檢并列的憲政依據(jù),審檢對(duì)應(yīng)的機(jī)構(gòu)設(shè)置,法官檢察官管理制度及審檢并列的制度價(jià)值等方面,論證審檢并列的司法體制架構(gòu)是中國(guó)特色的二元司法模式的組織基礎(chǔ)。 第四,中國(guó)二元司法模式的職權(quán)配置。從審檢職權(quán)配置的歷史演進(jìn)入手,對(duì)刑事訴訟中的審檢職權(quán)、民事行政訴訟中的審檢職權(quán)、非訴訟活動(dòng)中的審檢職權(quán)配置進(jìn)行闡述和分析,論證以實(shí)體裁判為特征的審判權(quán)和以程序控制為特征的檢察權(quán),是中國(guó)特色的二元司法模式的兩個(gè)核心。 第五,中國(guó)二元司法模式的運(yùn)行方式。從刑事訴訟之司法運(yùn)行,民事行政訴訟之司法運(yùn)行和中國(guó)特色的司法運(yùn)行規(guī)律等方面,分析論證以協(xié)調(diào)配合與監(jiān)督制約并行、訴訟與訴訟監(jiān)督同步為特征的司法方式,是中國(guó)特色的二元司法模式的價(jià)值體現(xiàn)。 第六,中國(guó)二元司法的模式改革完善。在闡明否定推行審判中心主義學(xué)術(shù)觀點(diǎn)的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)二元司法改革的目標(biāo)、原則、總體設(shè)想和具體對(duì)策進(jìn)行分析闡述,旨在實(shí)現(xiàn)二元司法模式的理論研究與司法實(shí)踐特別是當(dāng)前正在開(kāi)展的司法改革對(duì)接,為中國(guó)特色社會(huì)主義司法制度的建設(shè)與完善建言獻(xiàn)策。
[Abstract]:Under the guidance of Chinese Marxist legal view, this paper applies the multidisciplinary knowledge of political science, constitutional law, criminal law, civil law, economic law, administrative law and procedural law, based on China's national conditions, and on the basis of political theory. The origin of culture and history, the inheritance of judicial practice and the path of reform and development, etc., have expounded the scientific and reasonable dualistic judicial mode of judicial organ and procuratorial organ sharing judicial power under the system of people's Congress, from the organizational structure, power structure, etc. From the aspects of operation mode and perfect path, this paper clarifies the structural differences between the dual judicial model under the monolithic constitutional system of China and the judicial model of the judicial center under the three-power separation constitutional system in the West, and through responding to the academic viewpoint of questioning the dualistic judicial system, On the basis of the deep consideration of judicial power allocation mode and practice situation, this paper systematically answers the question of what is the dualistic judicial model with Chinese characteristics and how to build and perfect the dualistic judicial model. First, the concept and foundation of the dual judicial model in China, which mainly expounds the concept and connotation of the dual judicial model, and from the Marxism-Leninist theory of people's sovereignty and the thought of legal supervision. The theory system of socialism with Chinese characteristics about the basic theory of the people's Congress system and the foundation of China's national conditions and history and culture, etc., proves the rationality and necessity of this model. Second, the formation and development of the dual judicial model in China, which is the inevitable choice of the socialist system in the early days of the founding of the people's Republic of China, which is formed in the extraterritorial reference, consolidated in the practice of inheritance, and developed in the reform and opening up. It also combs and responds to the academic arguments about the judicial system and the nature of procuratorial power in this process. Thirdly, the organizational structure of the dual judicial model in China. Starting with the comparison of the regions of the dual judicial structure, this paper reveals the different constitutional orientation of the Chinese and Western judicial system and the differences in the concept and connotation of the judicial organs between China and the West, and the constitutional basis for the juxtaposition of the trial and inspection. This paper discusses that the judicial system structure of juxtaposition is the organizational basis of the dualistic judicial model with Chinese characteristics, such as the establishment of the corresponding organs, the management system of judges and procurators, and the system value of juxtaposition between the judges and procurators. Fourth, the power allocation of the dualistic judicial mode in China. Starting with the historical evolution of the allocation of the jurisdiction and powers of the trial and procuratorate, the author analyzes the powers and powers of the trial and inspection in the criminal proceedings and the civil administrative litigation. This paper expounds and analyzes the disposition of the power of trial and inspection in non-litigation activities, and proves that the judicial power characterized by substantive adjudication and the procuratorial power characterized by procedural control are the two cores of the dualistic judicial model with Chinese characteristics. Fifth, the mode of operation of Chinese dual judicial mode. From the aspects of judicial operation of criminal proceedings, judicial operation of civil and administrative proceedings and the law of judicial operation with Chinese characteristics, this paper analyzes and demonstrates the coordination and coordination with supervision and restriction. The judicial mode characterized by the synchronization of litigation and litigation supervision is the value embodiment of dual judicial mode with Chinese characteristics. Sixth, the mode reform of dualistic justice in China is perfect. On the basis of expounding the academic viewpoint of negating the pursuit of judicial centralism, this paper analyzes and expounds the objectives, principles, general assumptions and concrete countermeasures of the dual judicial reform. The purpose of this paper is to realize the theory research and judicial practice of dual judicial model, especially the connection of judicial reform that is being carried out at present, and to offer suggestions for the construction and perfection of socialist judicial system with Chinese characteristics.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D926

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 苗泳;;最高人民法院司法解釋權(quán)再思考——兼與郭輝、史景軒博士商榷[J];河北學(xué)刊;2014年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：1688125