本文選題：專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議　切入點(diǎn)：司法責(zé)任制　出處：《四川理工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版)》2017年05期

【摘要】：專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議是為合議庭提供參考性意見(jiàn)的議事咨詢機(jī)構(gòu),對(duì)于案件審理過(guò)程中發(fā)現(xiàn)的重要法律適用問(wèn)題或者其他重大疑難復(fù)雜問(wèn)題,獨(dú)任法官或者審判長(zhǎng)可以提請(qǐng)?jiān)�、庭長(zhǎng)召集專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議討論,其結(jié)論應(yīng)當(dāng)記錄在卷,供合議庭參考。專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議是中國(guó)特色的法院內(nèi)部向辦案法官提供咨詢意見(jiàn)的專(zhuān)門(mén)機(jī)構(gòu),是在走向?qū)徟歇?dú)立的特殊過(guò)程中,對(duì)法官自由辦案能力擔(dān)心而產(chǎn)生的一種特殊組織。它產(chǎn)生于2000年的審判長(zhǎng)聯(lián)席會(huì)議,正式確立于2015年。從調(diào)研的4個(gè)法院的專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的規(guī)則和運(yùn)行狀況來(lái)看,它已經(jīng)發(fā)揮了重要的作用,大部分規(guī)則具有共同的特點(diǎn)。但是從運(yùn)行情況來(lái)看,相對(duì)于巨大的案件數(shù)量,整體上運(yùn)用較少,對(duì)于專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的運(yùn)行情況,法官的評(píng)估結(jié)論是"一般",并無(wú)負(fù)面評(píng)價(jià),且對(duì)其前景持樂(lè)觀態(tài)度。為什么專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議在實(shí)踐中適用不多,原因在于審判中遇到自己把握不了的問(wèn)題,法官們的實(shí)際做法并非申請(qǐng)召開(kāi)專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議,而是通過(guò)私人關(guān)系向?qū)W界專(zhuān)家口頭咨詢、向有審判經(jīng)驗(yàn)的庭院長(zhǎng)和上級(jí)同行口頭咨詢,這種方法高效簡(jiǎn)單,但其中的向庭院長(zhǎng)和上級(jí)同行咨詢的做法,很容易演變成變相審批。故最高人民法院應(yīng)當(dāng)總結(jié)這些地方規(guī)則,確立專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的下列規(guī)則:確立召集會(huì)議的原因,確立提請(qǐng)、召集會(huì)議的主體,確立專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的人員結(jié)構(gòu),明確專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的議事范圍,明確專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的議事規(guī)則。
[Abstract]:The conference of professional judges is a deliberative advisory body that provides the collegial panel with a reference opinion. A single judge or the presiding judge may submit to the court any important legal application or other major difficult and complex problems found in the course of the case hearing. The President shall convene a conference of professional judges for discussion, the conclusions of which shall be recorded in the volume for the information of the collegial panel. The professional judges' conference is a specialized body within the Court with Chinese characteristics which provides advisory opinions to the judges handling cases, It is a special organization that is worried about the ability of judges to handle cases freely in the special process of independence of trial. It was born in the joint session of presiding judges in 2000. Officially established in 2015. It has played an important role in terms of the rules and functioning of the conference of professional judges of the four courts surveyed. Most of the rules have common characteristics. But in terms of operation, Compared with the large number of cases, the overall application is relatively small. The judges' assessment of the functioning of the professional judges' meetings is "general", and there is no negative evaluation. And optimistic about its future. Why professional judges' meetings are not used in practice, because they encounter problems that they cannot grasp during the trial, and the actual practice of the judges is not to apply for the convening of professional judges' meetings, Instead, oral advice is provided to academic experts through personal relations, and oral advice to court chiefs and superiors who have experience in trial. This method is efficient and simple, but the practice of consulting court presidents and superiors in this way is simple and efficient. Therefore, the Supreme people's Court should sum up these local rules and establish the following rules for the professional judges' meeting: establish the reasons for convening the meeting, establish the subject of the request and call the meeting, Establish the personnel structure of the professional judges' meeting, define the scope of the professional judges' meeting, and clarify the rules of procedure of the professional judge's meeting.
【作者單位】： 西南政法大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：國(guó)家社科基金重點(diǎn)項(xiàng)目(14AFX013) 最高人民法院重大理論課題(2014sp010) 中國(guó)法學(xué)會(huì)重點(diǎn)專(zhuān)項(xiàng)課題(CLS(2015)ZDZX10)
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D926.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 馮之東;;司法改革背景下的專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議制度研究[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2017年01期

2 張閏婷;;專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議機(jī)制的脈絡(luò)梳理和路徑探索——基于“群體決策支持系統(tǒng)”理論的視角[J];山東審判;2016年03期

3 冀祥德;;全面深化司法體制改革的兩個(gè)支點(diǎn)[J];北京聯(lián)合大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2015年03期

4 威姆·沃爾曼斯,王曉芳;司法委員會(huì)的職能與組織——?dú)W洲各國(guó)法院的司法行政管理模式比較研究[J];法律適用;2004年02期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 李少平;;深刻把握司法責(zé)任制內(nèi)涵 全面、準(zhǔn)確抓好《意見(jiàn)》的貫徹落實(shí)[N];人民法院報(bào);2015年

【共引文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前7條

1 高一飛;梅俊廣;;專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議制度實(shí)施情況的實(shí)證研究[J];四川理工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2017年05期

2 馮之東;;司法改革背景下的專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議制度研究[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2017年01期

3 馮之東;;司法改革背景下的專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議制度[J];哈爾濱工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2017年01期

4 白彥;;司法改革背景下我國(guó)法官員額制度問(wèn)題研究[J];云南社會(huì)科學(xué);2016年02期

5 卞宜良;林學(xué)華;;法國(guó)檢察官業(yè)績(jī)考評(píng)與晉升制度評(píng)析[J];人民檢察;2015年23期

6 張勝;;管理型法官的體制性考量[J];鄭州航空工業(yè)管理學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年02期

7 楊雄;;法院內(nèi)部組織制度改革研究[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)家;2007年02期

【二級(jí)參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 梁桂平;;論專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的功能定位及運(yùn)行模式[J];法律適用;2016年08期

2 吳思遠(yuǎn);;法官會(huì)議制度若干問(wèn)題剖析[J];中共中央黨校學(xué)報(bào);2016年04期

3 張閏婷;;專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議機(jī)制的脈絡(luò)梳理和路徑探索——基于“群體決策支持系統(tǒng)”理論的視角[J];山東審判;2016年03期

4 楊麗娟;;專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議運(yùn)行機(jī)制“儀式化”色彩之反思[J];東方法學(xué);2016年03期

5 李兆杰;牛艷;;司法改革視域下專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議的價(jià)值分析、存在問(wèn)題及優(yōu)化路徑——基于全國(guó)36個(gè)地方法院的專(zhuān)業(yè)法官會(huì)議實(shí)踐的研究[J];西華大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2016年02期

6 馮之東;;司法體制改革背景下的審判委員會(huì)制度——以司法責(zé)任制為切入點(diǎn)[J];時(shí)代法學(xué);2016年01期

7 O@化強(qiáng);;事實(shí)認(rèn)定“難題”與法官獨(dú)立審判責(zé)任落實(shí)[J];中國(guó)法學(xué);2015年06期

8 吳如巧;宋東;向治冰;;從“法官會(huì)議制度”看我國(guó)法院“去行政化”的困境與破解[J];探求;2015年06期

9 曹煒;熊靜;;司法改革語(yǔ)境下的法官會(huì)議探析[J];法律適用;2015年09期

10 蔣惠嶺;;論審判權(quán)運(yùn)行機(jī)制改革[J];北京行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2015年02期

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 ;中華全國(guó)律師協(xié)會(huì)常務(wù)理事會(huì)議事規(guī)則(試行)[J];中國(guó)律師;1995年08期

2 董t犛，

本文編號(hào)：1692576