【摘要】：當(dāng)事人陳述因其證明意義上的重要性,被我國(guó)《民事訴訟法》作為法定證據(jù)形式引入法律文本之中,但作為一種法定證據(jù)形式,當(dāng)事人陳述在實(shí)踐中并未得到充分的肯定和運(yùn)用。直至2015年《民事訴訟法司法解釋》的施行,增加了當(dāng)事人在陳述時(shí),應(yīng)當(dāng)遵循誠(chéng)實(shí)信用原則進(jìn)行宣誓和簽署保證書(shū)的程序性要求,其規(guī)定雖在一定程度上彌補(bǔ)了當(dāng)事人陳述在程序上設(shè)置的不足,但并未真正解決其在具體內(nèi)涵、證明價(jià)值、證據(jù)地位等相關(guān)制度因素設(shè)置上的空白。本文突破僅將當(dāng)事人陳述作為證據(jù)形式予以司法運(yùn)用的傳統(tǒng)、單一的視角,試圖在溝通主義法范式的指引下,將西方哈貝馬斯的商談理論與我國(guó)訴訟法部門(mén)中的當(dāng)事人陳述相結(jié)合,從而將傳統(tǒng)的訴訟視為一種事實(shí)與規(guī)范言語(yǔ)整合的過(guò)程。其中,當(dāng)事人陳述作為訴訟行為的基本形態(tài),是訴訟中最重要的言語(yǔ)活動(dòng)。全文除前言外,共分四個(gè)部分對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述制度予以探討。第一部分是對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述制度的概述。通過(guò)對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述概念的界定,更好的理解當(dāng)事人陳述的性質(zhì)、特點(diǎn)以及其所具有的功能。第二部分是對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述存在的問(wèn)題及其原因的分析。通過(guò)對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述在立法與司法實(shí)踐中存在問(wèn)題及原因的分析,為下文完善當(dāng)事人陳述制度的理論基礎(chǔ)提供前提。第三部分試圖通過(guò)哈貝馬斯的商談理論、民事訴訟溝通理論完善當(dāng)事人陳述制度的理論基礎(chǔ)。其中,對(duì)哈貝馬斯商談理論、民事訴訟溝通理論的闡述,為我國(guó)當(dāng)事人陳述商談理論體系提供了深厚的理論根基。第四部分是對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述制度完善具體路徑的設(shè)計(jì)。在真實(shí)性、正當(dāng)性、真誠(chéng)性原則的指導(dǎo)下,宏觀把握當(dāng)事人陳述的發(fā)展方向,通過(guò)區(qū)分詢問(wèn)與聽(tīng)取當(dāng)事人制度、確立詢問(wèn)當(dāng)事人程序規(guī)則、完善聽(tīng)取當(dāng)事人陳述制度、完善當(dāng)事人陳述約束機(jī)制以及完善當(dāng)事人陳述相關(guān)配套制度等對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述制度予以具體設(shè)計(jì),從而實(shí)現(xiàn)程序上的合法化與合理化的訴訟模式,進(jìn)而推進(jìn)當(dāng)代中國(guó)法治范式理論與實(shí)踐的深入發(fā)展與研究。
[Abstract]:Because of the importance of the party's statement in the sense of proof, the Civil procedure Law of our country has been introduced into the legal text as the form of legal evidence, but as a form of legal evidence, The party statement has not been fully affirmed and used in practice. Until the implementation of the Judicial interpretation of the Civil procedure Law in 2015, the procedural requirements for the parties to take the oath and sign the guarantee in accordance with the principle of good faith in their statements have been increased. Although its stipulation makes up for the deficiency of the party statement in the procedure to a certain extent, it does not really solve the blank in the setting of the specific connotation, proof value, evidence status and other related institutional factors. This paper breaks through the tradition of judicial application of the party's statement as the form of evidence, and tries to be guided by the pattern of communication law from a single perspective. Combining the negotiation theory of western Habermas with the statements of the parties in the procedural law department of our country, the traditional litigation is regarded as a process of the integration of facts and normative speech. Among them, as the basic form of litigation behavior, party statement is the most important speech activity in litigation. In addition to the preface, the full text is divided into four parts to discuss the party statement system. The first part is an overview of the party statement system. Through the definition of the concept of party statement, we can better understand the nature, characteristics and functions of the party statement. The second part is the analysis of the problems existing in the statement of the parties and their causes. Through the analysis of the problems and causes of the party statement in legislation and judicial practice, this paper provides the premise for perfecting the theoretical basis of the party statement system below. The third part tries to perfect the theoretical basis of the party statement system through Habermas' negotiation theory and civil litigation communication theory. Among them, the Habermas negotiation theory and the civil litigation communication theory provide a profound theoretical foundation for the party to state the negotiation theory system in our country. The fourth part is the design of the specific path to improve the party statement system. Under the guidance of the principles of authenticity, legitimacy and sincerity, we should grasp the development direction of the parties' statements, distinguish the system of asking and listening to the parties, establish the procedural rules of the parties to inquire, and perfect the system of listening to the statements of the parties. Perfecting the restriction mechanism of the party statement and perfecting the related supporting system of the party statement to design the party statement system concretely, so as to realize the procedural legalization and rationalization of the litigation mode. And then promote the in-depth development and research of the theory and practice of the paradigm of the rule of law in contemporary China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 彭莉;;對(duì)當(dāng)事人陳述問(wèn)題初探[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年09期

2 劉蕓;何金忠;;當(dāng)事人陳述制度之管見(jiàn)[J];延邊黨校學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

3 吉麗穎;;淺析當(dāng)事人陳述與查明案件事實(shí)的關(guān)聯(lián)[J];科技致富向?qū)?2014年08期

4 齊樹(shù)潔,王暉暉;當(dāng)事人陳述制度若干問(wèn)題新探[J];河南省政法管理干部學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2002年02期

5 張嘉軍,周時(shí)文;論當(dāng)事人陳述制度的改革[J];許昌學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年04期

6 王福華;當(dāng)事人陳述的制度化處理[J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2004年02期

7 李浩;當(dāng)事人陳述:比較、借鑒與重構(gòu)[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2005年03期

8 王亞新;陳杭平;;論作為證據(jù)的當(dāng)事人陳述[J];政法論壇;2006年06期

9 何文燕;劉波;;我國(guó)當(dāng)事人陳述制度之檢討與重構(gòu)——兼評(píng)民訴法《修改建議稿(第三稿)及立法理由》第十七章[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2007年02期

10 祝穎;;當(dāng)事人陳述程序規(guī)則探析[J];福建警察學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年04期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 鄭哲蘭;法官如何利用經(jīng)驗(yàn)確認(rèn)案件事實(shí)[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2006年

2 王維永;法官應(yīng)有的聽(tīng)訟素質(zhì)與心態(tài)[N];法制日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

3 牧野;法治代價(jià)與觸摸得到的公正[N];寧波日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

4 本報(bào)記者;不得因當(dāng)事人陳述申辯加重處罰[N];中國(guó)安全生產(chǎn)報(bào);2010年

5 ;打官司要做哪些準(zhǔn)備[N];吉林農(nóng)村報(bào);2007年

6 李元超;事故責(zé)任無(wú)法確定 法院酌定共同負(fù)擔(dān)[N];人民法院報(bào);2013年

7 王學(xué)政;行政處罰的證據(jù)(十六)[N];中國(guó)工商報(bào);2009年

8 廣西那坡縣人民法院 韓良波;借條有瑕疵 法律不保護(hù)[N];建筑時(shí)報(bào);2014年

9 北京尚劍律師事務(wù)所 姜杰;“扶人被訛”何須自殺證清白[N];上海法治報(bào);2014年

10 崔印寶 張雅君;稅務(wù)行政處罰九要點(diǎn)[N];河北經(jīng)濟(jì)日?qǐng)?bào);2002年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 劉國(guó)國(guó);我國(guó)當(dāng)事人陳述制度完善研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2013年

2 葉泓瑜;論我國(guó)民事訴訟當(dāng)事人陳述[D];廣東財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2016年

3 徐思嘉;論當(dāng)事人陳述[D];浙江大學(xué);2016年

4 馬壯;商談視閾下當(dāng)事人陳述制度研究[D];河北大學(xué);2017年

5 劉兵;民事訴訟中的當(dāng)事人陳述研究[D];蘇州大學(xué);2009年

6 覃國(guó)宇;論我國(guó)民事訴訟證據(jù)中的當(dāng)事人陳述[D];廣東商學(xué)院;2010年

7 張琨;論民事訴訟中的當(dāng)事人陳述[D];華東政法大學(xué);2010年

8 程金存;我國(guó)民事訴訟中的當(dāng)事人陳述問(wèn)題研究[D];四川大學(xué);2007年

9 李堯;當(dāng)事人陳述研究[D];南京師范大學(xué);2008年

10 王艷;論當(dāng)事人陳述的證據(jù)價(jià)值[D];西南政法大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號(hào)：2492225