本文選題：分離 + 協(xié)作　； 參考：《河南師范大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：我國十八屆四中全會提出審執(zhí)分離體制改革試點,意在實現(xiàn)權(quán)力的科學(xué)配置,以解決我國司法實踐中長期詬病的執(zhí)行問題,提高司法公信力,維護司法權(quán)威。執(zhí)行問題并非單個原因造成的,內(nèi)外因交織造成了最終結(jié)果,審執(zhí)分離改革即是從體制層面出發(fā),通過重新調(diào)整權(quán)力結(jié)構(gòu),尋求更加妥帖的制度設(shè)計。審判權(quán)與執(zhí)行權(quán)分離已達成共識,但對于審執(zhí)分離改革的具體方向和路徑,《決定》沒有具體指向,理論界與實務(wù)界對此有著不同的觀點,有的認(rèn)為在法院內(nèi)部實現(xiàn)審執(zhí)徹底分離,有的則認(rèn)為將執(zhí)行權(quán)從人民法院分離出去配置給司法行政機關(guān)。筆者認(rèn)為,民事審執(zhí)分離是一個復(fù)雜的問題,并不能淺顯地將其看為是將權(quán)力交于誰行使這么簡單,重點在于通過權(quán)力優(yōu)化配置將執(zhí)行權(quán)引入良性運行軌道,解決長久以來的判決后難執(zhí)、不執(zhí)和亂執(zhí)的現(xiàn)象,以助司法公信力的提高。對于審執(zhí)分離改革的具體路徑并不是通過理論邏輯推演而肆意預(yù)設(shè),而是必須與我國現(xiàn)實需求相結(jié)合地理性選擇,不能拋棄我國法院執(zhí)行長期的經(jīng)驗積累。改革應(yīng)是一個循序漸進的過程,從現(xiàn)有機制的完善逐步到最終體制的構(gòu)建,不能急于求成。本文聚焦于當(dāng)前分歧最大的民事領(lǐng)域,針對民事審判權(quán)與執(zhí)行權(quán)如何分離的問題進行分析研究。文章共分為四個部分,首先,從理論出發(fā),通過界定執(zhí)行權(quán)的性質(zhì)及其構(gòu)成,掌握執(zhí)行運行規(guī)律,理清審判與執(zhí)行之間的關(guān)系,把握審執(zhí)分離的限度以及審執(zhí)之間的銜接問題,為審執(zhí)分離的路徑選擇提供理論支持。其次,立足于我國審執(zhí)分離現(xiàn)狀,從立法與司法角度考究我國審執(zhí)運行現(xiàn)狀,反思現(xiàn)行審執(zhí)運行機制存在的問題。然后,通過對域外不同民事執(zhí)行配置模式的比較分析,總結(jié)其經(jīng)驗,為我國當(dāng)下的審執(zhí)分離體制改革奠定基礎(chǔ)。最后,基于對上述理論分析及現(xiàn)狀認(rèn)識,筆者認(rèn)為審執(zhí)分離是個漸進的過程,是民事執(zhí)行運行規(guī)律的體現(xiàn),我們應(yīng)在當(dāng)前司法實踐經(jīng)驗的基礎(chǔ)上進一步完善現(xiàn)行執(zhí)行機制,使審執(zhí)之間更妥善的銜接,使執(zhí)行運行更加順利有序,而不是追求形式上的徹底分離。基于理論邏輯與現(xiàn)實需求,當(dāng)前審執(zhí)分離改革應(yīng)當(dāng)在法院內(nèi)進行,即在法院內(nèi)部實現(xiàn)民事審判權(quán)與執(zhí)行權(quán)的徹底分離,通過現(xiàn)有審執(zhí)機制的完善,最終實現(xiàn)民事司法權(quán)的優(yōu)化配置。為了落實審執(zhí)分離工作的順利進行,筆者結(jié)合當(dāng)前法院試點經(jīng)驗,從立法、執(zhí)行權(quán)職權(quán)的重新劃定、具體人員配備以及執(zhí)行機構(gòu)的運行等方面提出改革建議。
[Abstract]:The fourth Plenary session of the 18th Central Committee of our country put forward the pilot reform of the separation system of trial and execution in order to realize the scientific allocation of power in order to solve the problem of execution that has been criticized for a long time in judicial practice in our country, to improve the credibility of the judiciary and to maintain the judicial authority.The implementation problem is not caused by a single reason, and the final result is caused by the intertwined internal and external factors. The reform of the separation of trial and execution is based on the system level, through the readjustment of the power structure, it seeks a more appropriate system design.A consensus has been reached on the separation of judicial power and executive power, but there is no specific direction for the specific direction and path of the reform of the separation of trial and execution, and the theoretical and practical circles have different views on it.Some of them think that the execution power should be separated from the people's court and allocated to the judicial administration organ.The author thinks that the separation of civil adjudication and execution is a complicated problem, which can not be regarded as simply giving power to who to exercise, and the emphasis lies in the introduction of executive power into the benign operation track through the optimal allocation of power.To solve the long-standing phenomenon of difficult, non-enforcement and random enforcement after judgment, to help improve the credibility of the judiciary.The specific path of the separation of trial and execution reform is not recklessly preset through theoretical logic, but must be combined with the actual needs of our rational choice, can not abandon our courts to implement long-term experience accumulation.Reform should be a gradual process, from the perfection of the existing mechanism to the construction of the final system.This paper focuses on the most divisive civil field and analyzes the separation of civil jurisdiction and executive power.The article is divided into four parts. Firstly, starting from the theory, by defining the nature and composition of executive power, mastering the law of execution, clarifying the relationship between trial and execution, grasping the limit of separation of trial and execution and the connection between trial and execution.It provides theoretical support for the path choice of separation of trial and execution.Secondly, based on the current situation of the separation of adjudication and enforcement in our country, this paper studies the current situation of the operation of adjudication from the angle of legislation and judicature, and reflects on the problems existing in the current mechanism of the operation of adjudication.Then, through the comparative analysis of different civil execution allocation modes in foreign countries, this paper summarizes its experience and lays a foundation for the reform of the separation system of trial and execution in our country.Finally, based on the above theoretical analysis and understanding of the present situation, the author thinks that the separation of trial and execution is a gradual process and the embodiment of the law of civil execution. We should further improve the current execution mechanism on the basis of the current judicial practice experience.Make the execution run smoothly and orderly rather than pursue the complete separation in form.Based on the theoretical logic and practical needs, the current reform of the separation of trial and execution should be carried out in the court, that is, to realize the complete separation of civil jurisdiction and executive power within the court, and to perfect the existing mechanism of adjudication.Finally, the optimal allocation of civil judicial power is realized.In order to carry out the separation of trial and execution smoothly, the author puts forward some reform suggestions from the aspects of legislation, redelineation of executive power and authority, concrete staffing and the operation of executive organization, combined with the current trial experience of the court.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D926.2

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王林清;張璇;;審判權(quán)與執(zhí)行權(quán)分離模式之建構(gòu)[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報;2016年05期

2 岳彩領(lǐng);;論強制執(zhí)行審執(zhí)分離模式之新構(gòu)建[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2016年03期

3 洪冬英;;論審執(zhí)分離的路徑選擇[J];政治與法律;2015年12期

4 肖建國;黃忠順;;論司法職權(quán)配置中的分離與協(xié)作原則——以審判權(quán)和執(zhí)行權(quán)相分離為中心[J];吉林大學(xué)社會科學(xué)學(xué)報;2015年06期

5 扈紀(jì)華;;“審執(zhí)分離”的科學(xué)路徑分析[J];人民法治;2015年07期

6 褚紅軍;刁海峰;朱嶸;;推動實行審判權(quán)與執(zhí)行權(quán)相分離體制改革試點的思考[J];法律適用;2015年06期

7 肖建國;;民事強制執(zhí)行與檢察監(jiān)督[J];國家檢察官學(xué)院學(xué)報;2013年01期

8 唐大瑜;;民事執(zhí)行難的成因及對策分析[J];法制與社會;2011年19期

9 江濤;;論審判權(quán)與執(zhí)行權(quán)關(guān)系的良性構(gòu)建[J];行政與法;2011年02期

10 肖建國;;中國民事執(zhí)行立法的模式選擇[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2011年01期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前5條

1 江必新;劉貴祥;;審判權(quán)和執(zhí)行權(quán)相分離的最優(yōu)模式[N];法制日報;2016年

2 馬艷;;覆蓋全國執(zhí)行查控體系基本形成[N];法制日報;2015年

3 葛行軍;;科學(xué)配置民事強制執(zhí)行權(quán)之我見[N];人民法院報;2015年

4 譚秋桂;;執(zhí)行機構(gòu)脫離法院違反民事執(zhí)行基本規(guī)律[N];人民法院報;2014年

5 肖建國;;民事執(zhí)行權(quán)和審判權(quán)應(yīng)在法院內(nèi)實行分離[N];人民法院報;2014年

，

本文編號：1752058