本文選題：司法考試 + 法學教育��； 參考：《南京大學》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：司法考試制度是法律職業(yè)的準入資格考試制度,也是保障司法公正的一項基礎性制度。國家統(tǒng)一司法考試制度的建立與實施,有助于提高法律職業(yè)隊伍的整體素質(zhì),促進法律職業(yè)共同體的形成。雖然統(tǒng)一司法考試制度的推行得到了一致好評,但是由于制度實施中暴露出種種問題,關于具體制度設計的爭論從未停止過。本文針對我國司法考試制度現(xiàn)狀存在的問題,分析成因,在比較分析美國和日本相關制度的基礎上提出自己的見解。本文第一部分對目前我國司法考試制度存在的諸多問題進行了分析,主要包括與法律職業(yè)的矛盾、與西部地區(qū)現(xiàn)狀的矛盾和與法學教育的矛盾三個方面。司法考試制度與法律職業(yè)的矛盾主要體現(xiàn)在統(tǒng)一司法考試導致了法律人才由司法官向律師行業(yè)的逆向流動,加重了基層司法官的斷檔。而司法官遴選制度與司法考試制度的脫節(jié),不利于優(yōu)秀的法律人才進入司法官的隊伍。司法考試制度與西部地區(qū)現(xiàn)狀的矛盾主要體現(xiàn)在西部司法考試通過率較低,降分放寬學歷等政策沒有實質(zhì)上解決西部法律人才匱乏的現(xiàn)狀,而應運而生的“小司考”制度更是極大地破壞了司法考試的權威性。司法考試與法學教育的矛盾主要體現(xiàn)在法學教育的培養(yǎng)目標與司法考試制度的考察要求存在沖突,學生紛紛投身于各種司考培訓輔導班,而忽視學校的基礎法學教育。本文第二部分對造成上述問題的成因進行了分析,筆者認為造成這些問題的原因有歷史遺留問題被忽視、地域差異的客觀存在和考試內(nèi)容和形式設計不合理三個因素。歷史遺留問題被忽視是指統(tǒng)一司法考試制度較之前的初任法官、檢察官資格考試難度加大,司法官遴選制度的不完善導致在職司法人員整體素質(zhì)不高,因而司法考試通過率較低。地域差異的客觀存在是指我國東西部地區(qū)區(qū)域發(fā)展不平衡,西部地區(qū)的法學教育水平與東部發(fā)達地區(qū)差異較大,導致了西部地區(qū)法律人才的匱乏�？荚噧�(nèi)容和形式設計不合理是指司法考試的一次性大大增加了通過考試的偶然性和投機性,而且考試內(nèi)容偏知識記憶性,對法律思維的考察比重不足。本文第三部分論述比較了美國及日本的司法考試制度以期對我國的司法考試制度改革有所啟示。美國實行法律職業(yè)一元化,法官、檢察官都是以律師職業(yè)為起點,只有律師職業(yè)資格考試,由各州自行組織進行,要求考生具有美國律師協(xié)會認可的法學院初級法學士的學位(J.D.)。日本司法考試制度2006年進行了改革,要求考生具有法科大學院的教育背景或者通過司法預備考試,所有司法考試合格人員需要進入司法研修所研修一年才能真正擁有法曹資格。雖然美國和日本的司法考試制度由于歷史傳統(tǒng)和文化背景的不同存在一些差異,但都十分注重考生法學教育的背景以及法律實務的訓練。本文第四部分從司法考試資格的改革、司法考試內(nèi)容和形式的改革、司法考試模式的改革以及司法考試配套制度的改革四個方面提出相關的完善建議。在借鑒發(fā)達國家成功經(jīng)驗的基礎上,筆者提出如下構(gòu)想：一是將我國司法考試的準考資格限定為法學教育背景；二是實行兩次考試的形式,增加主觀題的比重以考察考生的法律思維能力；三是將現(xiàn)行降分政策適用的戶籍范圍限制取消,鼓勵法律人才由東部發(fā)達地區(qū)向西部地區(qū)流動；四是改革完善司法官職業(yè)保障制度、法律職前培訓制度、法律碩士教育制度等司法考試的相關配套制度。
[Abstract]:The judicial examination system is the qualification examination system of the legal profession and a basic system to guarantee judicial justice. The establishment and implementation of the national unified judicial examination system will help to improve the overall quality of the legal professional team and promote the formation of the legal profession community. Although the implementation of the unified judicial examination system has been consistent, the implementation of the unified judicial examination system has been consistent. However, because of the problems exposed in the implementation of the system, the debate on the design of specific systems has never stopped. This paper analyzes the existing problems in the current situation of the judicial examination system in China, analyses the causes and puts forward his own opinions on the basis of comparative analysis of the relevant institutions of the United States and Japan. The contradiction between the legal profession and the contradiction between the legal profession and the contradiction between the legal profession and the contradiction between the western region and the law education in three aspects. The contradiction between the judicial examination system and the legal profession is mainly reflected in the unified judicial examination which leads to the reverse flow of legal personnel from the judicial officer to the lawyer profession. The separation of the judicial officer selection system and the judicial examination system is not conducive to the excellent legal personnel to enter the team of the judiciary. The contradiction between the judicial examination system and the current situation in the western region is mainly reflected in the low passing rate of the judicial examination in the western region, and the policy of lowering the score and relaxing the educational background has not essentially solved the talents of the western law. The lack of the status quo, and the emergence of the "small examination" system has greatly destroyed the authority of the judicial examination. The contradiction between the judicial examination and the legal education is mainly reflected in the conflict between the training target of the law education and the inspection of the judicial examination system. The second part of this paper makes an analysis of the causes of the above problems, and the author thinks that the reasons for these problems are neglected, the objective existence of regional differences and the unreasonable three factors of the examination content and form design. The neglect of the historical legacy is that the unified judicial examination system has been compared to the previous one. The first appointed judge, the difficulty of the examination of the prosecutor's qualification is more difficult, and the imperfect judiciary selection system leads to the poor overall quality of the judicial personnel. Therefore, the passing rate of the judicial examination is low. The objective existence of the regional differences is that the regional development is unbalanced in the Eastern and western regions of China, and the differences in the legal education level in the western region and the eastern developed areas are more different than that in the western region. It leads to the lack of legal talents in the western region. The unreasonable design of the examination content and form is that the one-time judicial examination has greatly increased the chance and speculation through the examination, and the content of the examination is partial to knowledge and memory, and the proportion of the legal thinking is insufficient. The third part of this paper compares the judicial examination of the United States and Japan. The trial system is intended to enlighten the reform of the judicial examination system in our country. In the United States, the United States implements a legal profession, and the judges and the prosecutors are the starting point of the lawyer profession. Only the professional qualification examination of the lawyers is organized by the States, and the candidates have the degree of the primary law bachelor's degree (J.D.), which is recognized by the American Bar Association. The law examination system was reformed in 2006, requiring the candidates to have the educational background of the law college or the judicial preparatory examination. All the qualified personnel of the judicial examination need to enter the judicial study for a year to truly possess the qualification of the law. There are some differences between them, but all of them pay great attention to the background of the law education of examinees and the training of legal practice. The fourth part of this paper puts forward some suggestions on the reform of the qualification of the judicial examination, the reform of the content and form of the judicial examination, the reform of the judicial examination mode and the reform of the judicial examination supporting system. On the basis of the successful experience of the country, the author puts forward the following ideas: first, the qualification of the quasi examination of the judicial examination is limited to the background of legal education; the two is the form of the two examination, increasing the proportion of the subjective questions to examine the legal thinking ability of the examinees; and the three is to cancel the limits of the household registration limits applicable to the current reduction policy and encourage them to be encouraged. The legal personnel flow from the eastern developed areas to the western regions; the four is to reform and improve the professional security system of the judicial officers, the legal pre training system, the legal master's education system and other relevant supporting system of the judicial examination.
【學位授予單位】：南京大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D926.15

【相似文獻】

相關期刊論文 前10條

1 張培田;中國司法考試制度建構(gòu)的思考[J];政法論壇;2002年02期

2 周菁;兩大法系司法考試制度的比較和借鑒[J];江蘇警官學院學報;2002年06期

3 趙云芬;司法考試制度及其價值分析[J];當代法學;2003年03期

4 周菁;兩大法系司法考試制度之比較與借鑒[J];山西省政法管理干部學院學報;2003年03期

5 黃永鋒;司法考試制度的悖論分析——一個制度—利益均衡論的進路[J];海南大學學報(人文社會科學版);2004年04期

6 孫衛(wèi);;關于完善當前司法考試制度的若干思考[J];臨滄教育學院學報;2004年04期

7 ;言論廣場[J];中國司法;2006年09期

8 黃薇;;中國司法考試制度的回顧與展望[J];司法;2008年00期

9 張西瑞;;淺議我國國家司法考試制度的“進口”和“出口”問題[J];中國司法;2008年02期

10 徐瑩;;論中國司法考試制度的完善[J];哈爾濱學院學報;2008年03期

相關會議論文 前3條

1 胡娟;;日本司法考試制度:一個歷史的考察[A];全國外國法制史研究會學術叢書——20世紀外國司法制度的變革[C];2002年

2 冷霞;;近代中國的司法考試制度[A];全國外國法制史研究會學術叢書——20世紀外國司法制度的變革[C];2002年

3 李欣;楊嘉慧;;國家司法考試背景下的法學教育改革研究[A];當代法學論壇（2011年第2輯）[C];2011年

相關重要報紙文章 前10條

1 記者 烏云斯琴;完善現(xiàn)行司法考試制度[N];人民政協(xié)報;2008年

2 付鵬;完善司法考試制度避免法官“斷檔”[N];人民政協(xié)報;2007年

3 本報記者 肖國忠　整理;推行兩次司法考試制度[N];光明日報;2010年

4 楊樹明;司法考試制度亟須完善[N];人民法院報;2008年

5 中國人民大學法學博士 丁相順;處在十字路口的日本司法考試制度[N];檢察日報;2001年

6 記者　張慶水;司考制度與法學教育正處于沖突與互動期[N];法制日報;2006年

7 劉復晨;韓國改革司法考試制度[N];法制日報;2007年

8 第十屆、十一屆全國政協(xié)委員 陳智倫　整理 本報記者 鐘鋼;一件提案與司法考試制度改革[N];人民政協(xié)報;2014年

9 袁祥 吳坤;關注國家司法考試制度[N];光明日報;2001年

10 記者　張慶水;今年司考報名考生達27.8萬余人[N];法制日報;2006年

相關碩士學位論文 前10條

1 董偉明;國家司法考試制度改革研究[D];中國社會科學院研究生院;2015年

2 洪虹;論我國司法考試制度的問題及其改進[D];南京大學;2014年

3 黃薇;法治化進程中的司法考試制度[D];西南政法大學;2008年

4 葉青;中國司法考試制度改革之探討[D];中國人民大學;2005年

5 柳彥理;我國現(xiàn)行司法考試制度的架構(gòu)分析[D];山東大學;2011年

6 霍踐燁;中國國家司法考試制度的困境與出路[D];吉林大學;2013年

7 楊寶鑫;我國司法考試制度建構(gòu)的思考[D];吉林大學;2005年

8 徐海珠;國家司法考試制度法制化研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學;2011年

9 李黎;試論國家司法考試制度的不足與完善[D];西南政法大學;2010年

10 張敏;論我國的司法考試制度及相關配套制度的改革完善[D];四川大學;2006年

，

本文編號：2022711