本文選題：司法　切入點：民主　出處：《吉林大學(xué)》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：長期以來，中國的司法體制改革始終面臨司法職業(yè)化與司法民主化兩種路徑取向的對峙。既有的司法民主問題研究僅僅關(guān)注到紛爭的表相，因此未能形成真正的理論交鋒。其實，這場紛爭背后暗涵的真正理論挑戰(zhàn)在于：西方化模式與本土化經(jīng)驗的磨擦、法律思維與道德（倫理）思維的較量、程序合理性與實質(zhì)合理性的沖突、個案正義優(yōu)先和普遍正義優(yōu)先的爭執(zhí)，而這些對峙最終又都可以在個人權(quán)利與社會利益的對立中找到根源。因此，探尋化解這些沖突與分歧的現(xiàn)實而有效的路徑，才是當(dāng)代中國司法民主問題研究的真問題。 中外學(xué)者對于司法民主問題的研究，大致形成了三種理論進路：主體民主進路、立憲民主進路以及程序民主進路。但是，由于對“民主”這一核心概念存在誤解和分歧，這三種進路都無法建構(gòu)起具有說服力且能真正有效化解紛爭的“司法民主”理念。因此，通過對現(xiàn)代民主理論之協(xié)商轉(zhuǎn)向的分析，并運用語義分析的方法澄清了“民主”與“司法”的現(xiàn)代內(nèi)涵之后，本論文嘗試開辟一種協(xié)商民主的研究進路對司法民主進行理念重構(gòu)。 基于這一協(xié)商民主的理論進路，，不僅揭示了“民主”與“司法”之間的內(nèi)源性關(guān)系及理論關(guān)聯(lián)，更進一步揭示了現(xiàn)代“司法民主”的理論內(nèi)涵，從而指出，確保司法資源在社會中的平等、合理分配、建立司法理念的“公共性”品性以及實現(xiàn)司法獨立與司法責(zé)任的并重，既是現(xiàn)代司法民主理念的應(yīng)有之義，更是衡量司法是否具有民主性以及民主性程度高低的重要指標(biāo)。 然而，這一經(jīng)過重構(gòu)的司法民主理念是否具有說服力呢？在這一追問的引領(lǐng)下，我們必須將視野從理論與概念轉(zhuǎn)向歷史和現(xiàn)實。經(jīng)歷長期的理論積淀與經(jīng)驗試錯，西方的司法民主理論與實踐表明：在面對現(xiàn)實困境與理論挑戰(zhàn)時，正是基于民主理論的協(xié)商轉(zhuǎn)向完成了司法民主理念的轉(zhuǎn)型，才進一步推進了司法民主運行機制的制度創(chuàng)新與完善。通過對中國司法民主化歷程的回顧與反思，我們也發(fā)現(xiàn)，中國的司法民主化改革之所以舉步維艱，正是因為在一種被誤讀的民主觀影響下，形成了一種被錯誤理解的司法民主理念，進而導(dǎo)致司法民主運行機制的運轉(zhuǎn)不良。 因此，以協(xié)商民主語境中的司法民主理念為指導(dǎo)，在對中西方歷史與現(xiàn)實的關(guān)照和反思基礎(chǔ)上，分析了當(dāng)代中國司法民主的重要制度保障，主要應(yīng)包括以下五個方面：即司法獨立制度的法律化與制度化；司法主體機制從“供給者”向“需求者”的視角轉(zhuǎn)換；司法程序運行機制從“對抗式”向“合作式”的重心轉(zhuǎn)換；司法問責(zé)與監(jiān)督機制的規(guī)范化建設(shè)；司法附生機制從“一元”到“多元”的建立等等。
[Abstract]:For a long time, the reform of the judicial system Chinese always facing judicial occupation and judicial democracy two orientation confrontation. The existing problems of judicial democracy only concerned about the dispute Biaoxiang, therefore failed to form a theory of real confrontation. In fact, the real challenge of the theory behind the dispute culvert is: friction Western Modes the experience and localization, legal thinking and morality (Ethics) thinking of the contest, procedural rationality and the substantive rationality of the conflict, individual justice priority and universal justice priority dispute, but the confrontation eventually has its roots in the opposition of individual rights and social interests. Therefore, seeking to resolve these conflicts and differences of reality the effective path is really the problem of judicial democracy China contemporary issues.
Study on the issue of judicial democracy in China and foreign countries has formed approximately three theoretical approaches: the main route of democracy, constitutional democracy approach and procedure democracy approach. However, due to the existence of misunderstandings and disagreements on "democracy" of the core concept, the three approaches are unable to construct a persuasive and can really effectively resolve disputes "the concept of" judicial democracy. Therefore, analysis of steering through consultation on the modern democratic theory, modern connotation and clarification of "democracy" and "justice" using the method of semantic analysis, this thesis tries to open up a research approach of deliberative democracy concept reconstruction of judicial democracy.
This approach is based on the theory of deliberative democracy, not only reveals the intrinsic relations and relations between democracy "and" justice ", further reveals the modern" judicial democracy "theory, and thus points out that to ensure judicial equality of resources in society, rational distribution, to establish the judicial idea of" public "the character and the realization of judicial independence and responsibility of both, righteousness is the modern judicial idea of democracy, it is an important indicator to measure whether judicial democratic and democratic level.
However, the concept of judicial democracy after reconstruction are convincing? This question in the lead, we must view from the theory and concepts to history and reality. Through the theory and experience of long-term accumulation of trial and error, show that the theory and practice of Western Judicial Democracy: in the face of difficulties and challenges the theory. It is the theory of democracy consultation based on the turn completed the transformation of judicial democracy, to further promote the system innovation and improve the operating mechanism of judicial democracy. Through the review and Reflection on China judicial democratization process, we also found that the judicial democratization reform China is difficult, it is because the concept of democracy is misreading effect in a form, a wrong understanding of the concept of judicial democracy, judicial democracy and lead to mechanism of dysfunction.
Therefore, the deliberative democracy in the context of the idea of judicial democracy as a guide, in the western history and reality care and Reflection on the basis of analysis of the important system China judicial democracy of contemporary security, mainly includes the following five aspects: legal and institutional system of judicial independence; judicial subject conversion mechanism from the "supply" to "demand" from the perspective of judicial procedure; operation mechanism of transformation from "confrontation" to "focus of cooperation"; judicial accountability and supervision mechanism of the standard question of construction; the judicial mechanism from the "one yuan" attached to "pluralism" and so on.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D926

【引證文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條

1 孫永興;李明;;論多向度的司法民主[J];前沿;2013年05期

2 石艷芳;李曉磊;;公眾參審的實踐進路之探討[J];中國刑事法雜志;2013年10期

3 張毅;;“人民司法”與當(dāng)代中國司法理念現(xiàn)代化[J];揚州大學(xué)學(xué)報(人文社會科學(xué)版);2014年05期

4 周珂;騰延娟;;論協(xié)商民主機制在中國環(huán)境法治中的應(yīng)用[J];浙江大學(xué)學(xué)報(人文社會科學(xué)版);2014年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 周隆基;制度性歧視的法律規(guī)制研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2014年

本文編號：1693217