本文選題：法庭之友 + 公益訴訟��； 參考：《蘭州大學(xué)》2015年碩士論文

【摘要】：隨著改革開放的不斷深入和權(quán)利意識(shí)的增強(qiáng),公眾對(duì)司法公正和司法民主的的企盼日益高漲。與此同時(shí),2012年通過的《中華人民共和國民事訴訟法修正案》第九條首次在國家立法層面對(duì)環(huán)境公益訴訟做出明確規(guī)定,具有深遠(yuǎn)的意義,也彰顯了我國法治建設(shè)向“以人為本”和“權(quán)利本位”理念邁進(jìn)的重大進(jìn)步。適格主體為了維護(hù)社會(huì)公共利益而提起公益訴訟,關(guān)注公益訴訟的社會(huì)公眾通過“法庭之友”制度向法庭提交書狀以表達(dá)意見和補(bǔ)充信息,程序化的司法參與機(jī)制既是深化司法民主化改革的必要舉措,也是克服公共輿論的盲目性和非理性的最佳途徑,讓公眾去說服公眾比單純?nèi)?qiáng)調(diào)司法權(quán)威、強(qiáng)調(diào)輿論不得干擾司法來得更為有效。本文通過比較研究法、實(shí)證分析法等研究方法,分為四個(gè)部分展開研究：第一部分主要闡述“法庭之友”的詞源演變及該制度在英美國家和國際組織的實(shí)際運(yùn)作狀況。第二部分析“法庭之友”制度引入公益訴訟的實(shí)踐訴求。面對(duì)司法與民意的博弈,法院既不能無原則地一昧妥協(xié),也不能消極噤聲或被動(dòng)應(yīng)對(duì),而應(yīng)適度開放傳統(tǒng)的封閉程序,主動(dòng)爭取和合理吸納民意。第三部分重點(diǎn)分析將“法庭之友”制度引入我國公益訴訟的理論基礎(chǔ)。在公益訴訟中構(gòu)建“法庭之友”制度,拓寬渠道滿足各種利益主體的多層次需求,使民主時(shí)代公眾中所秉持的正義良知與司法的職業(yè)理性形成最大共識(shí),是置身于現(xiàn)代化進(jìn)程拐點(diǎn)的中國法院不能推卸的責(zé)任。第四部分提出在公益訴訟中引入“法庭之友”的具體設(shè)想,包括宏觀方面的法律安排以及微觀方面的技術(shù)設(shè)計(jì),構(gòu)建“法庭之友”的適用主體、適用范圍、啟動(dòng)機(jī)制及配套措施等,以此拓寬司法與民意的溝通空間,彌補(bǔ)我國現(xiàn)有司法制度的不足。
[Abstract]:With the deepening of reform and opening up and the strengthening of the consciousness of right, the public's expectation of judicial justice and judicial democracy is rising day by day. At the same time, Article 9 of the Amendment to the Civil procedure Law of the people's Republic of China, adopted in 2012, for the first time explicitly stipulates environmental public interest litigation at the national legislative level, which has far-reaching significance. It also demonstrates the great progress of the construction of rule of law towards the concept of "people-oriented" and "right-based". In order to protect the public interest, the suitably subject filed a public interest lawsuit. The public concerned about the public interest litigation submitted a pleadings to the court through the amicus curiae system to express their opinions and supplementary information. The procedural judicial participation mechanism is not only the necessary measure to deepen the reform of judicial democratization, but also the best way to overcome the blindness and irrationality of public opinion. It is more effective to emphasize that public opinion should not interfere with the administration of justice. This thesis is divided into four parts through comparative research and empirical analysis. The first part mainly expounds the etymological evolution of amicus curiae and the actual operation of the system in Anglo-American countries and international organizations. The second part analyzes the practical appeal of the introduction of amicus curiae system into public interest litigation. In the face of the game between judicature and public opinion, the court can neither compromise unprincipled nor passively silence or respond passively, but should appropriately open the traditional closed procedure and actively strive for and reasonably absorb public opinion. The third part focuses on the theoretical basis of introducing amicus curiae system into public interest litigation in China. To construct the amicus curiae system in public interest litigation, to broaden the channels to meet the multi-level needs of various interest subjects, and to form the greatest consensus between the just conscience and the professional rationality of justice held by the public in the democratic era. It is the responsibility that the Chinese courts cannot shirk at the inflection point of the modernization process. The fourth part puts forward the concrete idea of introducing amicus curiae into public interest litigation, including macroscopic legal arrangement and microcosmic technical design, and constructs the subject and scope of application of amicus curiae. In order to widen the communication space between judicature and public opinion and make up the deficiency of our country's current judicial system, we should start up the mechanism and supporting measures.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：蘭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2015
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前9條

1 肖永平;李韶華;;美國法庭之友制度的價(jià)值緯度與實(shí)證研究[J];東方法學(xué);2011年04期

2 張小燕;齊樹潔;;程序輸入的新渠道——“法庭之友”制度及其借鑒意義[J];廈門大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;2006年01期

3 劉寬;;淺析WTO爭端解決機(jī)制中的“法庭之友”制度[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年24期

4 徐霄桐;孫悅;;人民陪審員如何走出“陪而不審”[J];工會(huì)信息;2014年14期

5 劉衛(wèi);WTO爭端解決機(jī)制中的“法庭之友”[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)與社會(huì)發(fā)展;2004年01期

6 林亮景;;論陪審制度的完善——以人民陪審員陪而不審為視角[J];四川教育學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年04期

7 田成有,陳令華;法治現(xiàn)代化的啟動(dòng)與傳統(tǒng)法文化的創(chuàng)造性轉(zhuǎn)化[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);1998年06期

8 陳克剛;;人民陪審員何以“陪而不審”[J];西南政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2008年05期

9 吳英姿;王筱文;;陪審制、民意與公民社會(huì)——從河南人民陪審團(tuán)實(shí)驗(yàn)展開[J];政治與法律;2011年03期

，

本文編號(hào)：2096653