【摘要】：陪審制度的雛形最早出現(xiàn)在古希臘和羅馬時(shí)代,經(jīng)過(guò)了從證人角色到司法裁判者的嬗變,在英美法系國(guó)家發(fā)展興盛,同時(shí)被世界各國(guó)仿效移植。陪審制度是國(guó)家審判機(jī)關(guān)吸收普通民眾參與案件審判的一種司法制度,在不同的國(guó)家有不同的表現(xiàn)形式。在英美法系國(guó)家表現(xiàn)為陪審團(tuán)陪審模式,在大陸法系國(guó)家表現(xiàn)為參審模式。我國(guó)的人民陪審制度屬于參審制,是在借鑒原蘇聯(lián)司法經(jīng)驗(yàn)的基礎(chǔ)上并結(jié)合我國(guó)具體司法實(shí)踐逐步形成的,在它存在的半個(gè)多世紀(jì)以來(lái),彰顯出其自身的多種價(jià)值：維護(hù)人民主權(quán)、促進(jìn)司法公正、保障司法獨(dú)立等。但同時(shí)由于人民陪審制度自身還存在一定的缺陷,在運(yùn)行過(guò)程中出現(xiàn)“陪而不審”、“審而不議”等現(xiàn)象,陪審制度的功能被架空了。所以在理論界和實(shí)務(wù)界出現(xiàn)了陪審制度的存廢爭(zhēng)議。尤其是在全國(guó)人民代表大會(huì)通過(guò)并實(shí)施《關(guān)于完善人民陪審員制度的決定》之后,陪審制度再次成為大家關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn)之一,人民陪審制的存廢以及它的發(fā)展模式成為學(xué)界爭(zhēng)論的重點(diǎn)。 陪審制在古代奴隸制社會(huì)表現(xiàn)為陪審法庭,作為集體裁決模式反映了古代西方國(guó)家奴隸制民主制度的特點(diǎn),隨后陪審制度主要服務(wù)于王室行政,經(jīng)過(guò)亨利二世的改革,逐漸普遍應(yīng)用于司法領(lǐng)域。陪審團(tuán)的角色也由最初的證人角色逐漸過(guò)渡到司法裁判者,通過(guò)與王室權(quán)力的斗爭(zhēng),由君主專(zhuān)制統(tǒng)治的工具轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)榉磳?duì)王權(quán)專(zhuān)政、維護(hù)平民權(quán)益的堡壘,走向一個(gè)平民化的道路。本文從比較的角度闡述了陪審制度在英美法系和大陸法系的功能,揭示了從陪審員選任到陪審制具體運(yùn)作所一直遵循的原則,即陪審制的平民化原則,以及這種普通民眾參與司法所具有的價(jià)值：平民化的民主價(jià)值,平民化的公正價(jià)值,平民化的自由價(jià)值。筆者主張,陪審制的平民化才是其制度本色,只有平民化的陪審員才能維護(hù)平民的利益。鑒于我國(guó)人民陪審制在選任方式以及運(yùn)行過(guò)程中都存在著平民化的缺失,筆者從陪審員選任的平民化及陪審員參審的平民化角度提出了實(shí)現(xiàn)人民陪審制平民化的幾點(diǎn)設(shè)想建議,期望能夠推動(dòng)司法體制的進(jìn)一步完善。
[Abstract]:The embryonic form of jury system first appeared in ancient Greece and Rome, after the evolution from witness role to judicial judge, it developed and flourished in Anglo-American law countries, and was imitated and transplanted by countries all over the world. The jury system is a kind of judicial system in which the ordinary people are involved in the trial by the national judicial organs, which have different forms of expression in different countries. Jury system is the mode in Anglo-American law countries, and it is in civil law system. The system of people's jury in our country belongs to the system of trial participation. It has been gradually formed on the basis of drawing lessons from the judicial experience of the former Soviet Union and combining with the specific judicial practice of our country. It has existed for more than half a century. Show its own various values: to safeguard the sovereignty of the people, to promote judicial justice, to ensure judicial independence. But at the same time, because of the defects of the people's jury system itself, the function of the jury system has been set up because of the phenomenon of "accompanying without trial" and "not discussing" in the course of operation. Therefore, the jury system in the theoretical and practical circles of the existence and abolition of controversy. Especially after the National people's Congress adopted and implemented the decision on perfecting the people's jury system, the jury system has once again become one of the focuses of attention. The retention and abolition of the people's jury system and its development model have become the focus of the academic debate. Jury system in ancient slavery society as the jury court, as a collective adjudication model reflects the characteristics of the democratic system of slavery in ancient western countries, then the jury system mainly served the royal administration, after Henry II's reform. It is gradually applied to the judicial field. The role of the jury was also gradually transferred from the original witness role to the judicial adjudicator. Through the struggle against the royal power, the jury was transformed from an instrument of monarchy to a fortress against Wang Quan's dictatorship and safeguarding the rights and interests of the common people. On the path of popularisation. This paper expounds the function of jury system in Anglo-American law system and civil law system from the angle of comparison, and reveals the principle that the jury system has been following from the selection of jurors to the concrete operation of jury system, that is, the civilian principle of jury system. And this kind of ordinary people participation in justice has the value: the civilian democratic value, the civilian justice value, the civilian free value. The author argues that the civilian jury system is the essence of its system, only the civilian jurors can safeguard the interests of civilians. In view of the lack of popularization in the selection and operation of the people's jury system in our country, the author puts forward some tentative suggestions to realize the popularization of the people's jury system from the point of view of the civilian selection of jurors and the civilian participation of jurors. It is expected to promote the further improvement of the judicial system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D926.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李玉華;;中國(guó)陪審制度的現(xiàn)狀與未來(lái)[J];中國(guó)司法;2009年08期

2 周永坤;;我們需要什么樣的司法民主[J];法學(xué);2009年02期

3 汪建成;;非驢非馬的“河南陪審團(tuán)”改革當(dāng)慎行[J];法學(xué);2009年05期

4 趙明霞;;淺議人民陪審員的選任資格——精英化和平民化之爭(zhēng)[J];法制與社會(huì);2007年03期

5 伍為;;陪審制的歷史解讀[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年13期

6 李?lèi)?ài)玲;;英美法系陪審制度對(duì)我國(guó)的借鑒價(jià)值[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年14期

7 王冬冬;;我國(guó)人民陪審制度應(yīng)走向平民化——兼議《關(guān)于完善人民陪審員制度的決定》的有關(guān)規(guī)定[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年14期

8 拉毛揚(yáng)措;;人民陪審制度研究[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年32期

9 丁以升;;兩大法系陪審制度比較研究[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2007年06期

10 宋宗宇;陪審制度的歷史起源比較研究[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2005年03期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 清華大學(xué)法學(xué)院教授、博士生導(dǎo)師 張衛(wèi)平;[N];人民法院報(bào);2002年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 宋秋艷;美國(guó)陪審制度研究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2006年

2 趙健健;人民陪審員選任制度改革探討[D];西南政法大學(xué);2007年

3 趙雷;淺析兩大法系陪審制度[D];中國(guó)海洋大學(xué);2008年

4 張飛飛;英美陪審制度的演進(jìn)與現(xiàn)代啟示[D];青島大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：2409841