本文選題：人民陪審員制度 + 法律問題�。� 參考：《中國法學(xué)》2017年01期

【摘要】：事實問題具有法律性,法律問題具有事實性,因此在理論上很難找到清晰而明確的標準準確地區(qū)分刑事陪審中的法律問題與事實問題。境外刑事陪審實踐中對法律問題與事實問題之區(qū)分,主要是通過程序機制的方法明確法官和陪審員的具體職責(zé),由此形成了一般裁定和問題清單兩種不同的模式。我國刑事陪審中法律問題與事實問題的區(qū)分,既要遵循法哲學(xué)上有關(guān)訴訟中區(qū)分法律問題與事實問題的基本規(guī)律,又要充分考慮我國法律傳統(tǒng)和司法實踐等因素。
[Abstract]:The fact question has the legal nature, the legal question has the fact nature, therefore in the theory, it is very difficult to find the clear and clear standard accurately to distinguish the legal question and the fact question in the criminal jury trial. The distinction between legal issues and factual issues in the practice of overseas criminal jury is mainly to clarify the specific duties of judges and jurors by means of procedural mechanism, thus forming two different modes of general ruling and list of questions. The distinction between legal problems and factual issues in criminal jury trial in our country should not only follow the basic law of distinguishing legal issues from factual issues in legal philosophy, but also fully consider the legal tradition and judicial practice of our country.
【作者單位】： 對外經(jīng)濟貿(mào)易大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【基金】：國家2011計劃“司法文明協(xié)同創(chuàng)新研究中心” 中國法學(xué)會2015年重點課題“我國刑事陪審中法律問題與事實問題的區(qū)分”[項目批準號:CLS(2015)B11]的研究成果
【分類號】：D926.2

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 方麗冬;盧婧Z，

本文編號：1847535