發(fā)布時間：2018-02-07 15:47

  本文關(guān)鍵詞： 審判團隊 司法責任 權(quán)力清單 員額制 司法輔助人員　出處：《山東大學》2017年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：審判團隊是為完成特定審判工作任務,以獨任庭和合議庭為核心,輔之以一定數(shù)量的司法輔助人員所組成的結(jié)構(gòu)相對固定、獨立,職責分工明確的辦案單元。它是管理學中的團隊概念與司法實踐相結(jié)合的產(chǎn)物。當前,司法責任制改革以"讓審理者裁判,由裁判者負責"為目標,以調(diào)整審判權(quán)力運行機制為統(tǒng)領(lǐng),進行了一系列的制度設計,為破解司法實踐難題提供了新的路徑。審判團隊正是改革審判權(quán)運行機制過程中的創(chuàng)新。審判團隊在各地的試點取得諸多成效,但其所內(nèi)含的一些關(guān)系尚未明晰,其運行過程中亦出現(xiàn)了一些問題需要正視和解決。本文主要運用邏輯分析法和比較分析法,對審判團隊制度進行系統(tǒng)研習。第一部分為審判團隊制度概述。主要論述審判團隊的內(nèi)涵、特征、價值功能和目前各地試行審判團隊的主要模式。首先,結(jié)合審判團隊的概念,分析其具有四個特征:以完成特定審判工作任務為目標;以獨任庭和合議庭為核心;結(jié)構(gòu)相對固定、對外相對獨立且職能分工明確;需承擔明確的責任。其次,總結(jié)了審判團隊的三種價值功能:優(yōu)化審判資源配置,解決案多人少矛盾;強化專業(yè)化審理,提高案件審判質(zhì)效;弱化案件審批,以促進去行政化進程。最后,著重分析了山東省L市S區(qū)的審判團隊建設情況。第二部分討論在司法責任制改革大環(huán)境下審判團隊與司法責任的關(guān)系。筆者分析認為,在建設審判團隊時應同時制定審判人員權(quán)力清單制度,審判團隊成員以權(quán)力清單為銜接承擔相應的責任;另外,研討了審判團隊的責任歸屬即追責的范圍、追責的程序、保障審判團隊依法履職的核心措施等。第三部分研究審判團隊建設的核心問題。首先是員額制下審判團隊中的法官重塑。探討了審判團隊與審判組織、內(nèi)設機構(gòu)的關(guān)系;審判團隊中的法官與院庭長、審判長的關(guān)系;審判團隊內(nèi)法官的權(quán)力清單。其次是司法輔助人員隊伍的建設路徑。探討了司法輔助人員的定位、法官助理與法官及書記員的關(guān)系、法官助理和書記員的權(quán)力清單。最后歸納了當前審判團隊建設運轉(zhuǎn)中存在的問題。筆者將其分為團隊組建前的先天缺陷和團隊運行中的后天不足兩大類共六個方面問題。第四部分提供完善審判團隊建設的若干建議。一是合理確定各類審判團隊的組建數(shù)量,二是確保全體員額法官均編入團隊,三是保證團隊成員雙向選擇自愿組合,四是設計靈活的審判團隊分案機制,五是強化對于審判團隊的管理與監(jiān)督,六是科學考評審判團隊工作業(yè)績。
[Abstract]:The judicial team is relatively fixed and independent in its structure, which is composed of a certain number of judicial auxiliaries in order to complete a specific task of trial, with the sole and collegial panels as the core, and supplemented by a certain number of judicial auxiliaries. It is the result of the combination of the concept of team and judicial practice in management. At present, the reform of judicial responsibility system aims to "let the adjudicator judge, let the adjudicator be responsible" as the goal. Under the guidance of adjusting the operating mechanism of judicial power, a series of system designs have been carried out. It provides a new way to solve the problem of judicial practice. The judicial team is the innovation in the process of reforming the operating mechanism of judicial power. The trial team has made many achievements in the pilot projects in various places, but some of the relations contained therein have not yet been clarified. Some problems need to be addressed and solved in the course of operation. This paper mainly uses logical analysis method and comparative analysis method. The first part is an overview of the trial team system. It mainly discusses the connotation, characteristics, value function of the trial team and the main mode of trial team being tried out in various places. First, combining the concept of the trial team, The analysis has four characteristics: to complete a specific task of trial as the goal; to single panel and collegiate panel as the core; relatively fixed structure, relatively independent of the external and clear division of functions; need to undertake clear responsibilities. This paper summarizes the three value functions of the trial team: optimizing the allocation of trial resources, solving the contradiction between more and less cases, strengthening the specialized trial, improving the quality of the case, weakening the examination and approval of the case, in order to promote the process of deadministration. The second part discusses the relationship between judicial team and judicial responsibility under the environment of judicial responsibility system reform. When building a trial team, a system of list of rights for judicial personnel should be formulated at the same time, and members of the trial team should take the list of rights as the link to bear the corresponding responsibility. In addition, the scope of the responsibility of the trial team, that is, the scope of responsibility, and the procedure for pursuing responsibility, are discussed. The third part studies the core problems of the construction of judicial team. Firstly, the judges in the judicial team under the post system are remolded. The relationship between the trial team and the trial organization and the internal organization is discussed. The relationship between the judges in the trial team and the president of the court, the chief judge, the list of the judges' powers in the trial team, and the path of the construction of the judicial auxiliary personnel are followed. The position of the judicial auxiliary personnel is discussed. The relationship between assistant judges and judges and clerks, Finally, the author summarizes the problems existing in the construction of the trial team. The author divides them into two categories: the congenital defects before the formation of the team and the acquired deficiency in the operation of the team, which are divided into six categories: one is the congenital defect before the establishment of the team, and the other is the acquired deficiency in the operation of the team. Part 4th provides a number of suggestions for improving the construction of judicial teams. First, it is reasonable to determine the number of various types of judicial teams to be set up. The second is to ensure that all post judges are integrated into the team, the third is to ensure that the team members choose a voluntary combination in both directions, the fourth is to design a flexible trial team case-splitting mechanism, and the fifth is to strengthen the management and supervision of the trial team. Sixth, scientific evaluation of the performance of the trial team.
【學位授予單位】：山東大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：D926.2

【相似文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 沈木珠;司法法治的思考與構(gòu)想[J];法商研究(中南政法學院學報);2000年05期

2 劉武俊;尊重司法的個性[J];中國改革;2000年05期

3 朱應平;滿意是衡量司法的至上標準嗎[J];華東政法學院學報;2001年03期

4 黃春;;當前我國司法行為行政化的理性思考[J];成都大學學報(社會科學版);2006年04期

5 黃春;;當前我國司法行為行政化的危害、成因與解決途徑[J];甘肅行政學院學報;2006年02期

6 譚世貴;李建波;;論司法和諧及其實現(xiàn)[J];時代法學;2007年04期

7 孫海華;;改變司法行政化 法官才能正�；痆J];吉林人大工作;2008年05期

8 楊濤;;2008年法治在司法與民意糾纏中跋涉前進[J];人大研究;2009年04期

9 任永安;;論司法行政化及其解決之道[J];暨南學報(哲學社會科學版);2009年05期

10 左春和;;司法的本真[J];社會科學論壇;2014年05期

相關(guān)會議論文 前2條

1 吳天昊;;論“司法和諧”的實現(xiàn)路徑[A];上海市社會科學界第五屆學術(shù)年會文集（2007年度）（政治·法律·社會學科卷）[C];2007年

2 張文雙;;關(guān)于執(zhí)行工作改革的若干思考[A];2003年度全省法院“法官職業(yè)化建設理論與實踐”研討會論文專輯[C];2003年

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前10條

1 ;深入推進公正司法 大力提升司法公信[N];人民法院報;2013年

2 海南大學法學院副教授 王琳;司法改革有賴地方實踐與頂層推動[N];廣州日報;2013年

3 浙江工商大學法學院 謝澍;面對新媒體，司法需質(zhì)變[N];光明日報;2013年

4 朱昌俊;破案率排名應廢，，更需去司法行政化[N];新華每日電訊;2013年

5 游偉;不斷深化改革，著力消除司法行政化[N];法制日報;2014年

6 戴玉偉;關(guān)于司法改革的若干思考[N];人民代表報;2002年

7 ;學術(shù)視野下的司法能力建設[N];人民法院報;2004年

8 志靈;院長審案和法官審案區(qū)別何在[N];東方早報;2007年

9 陳燦平;司法本學與規(guī)范化[N];人民法院報;2005年

10 李林 中國社會科學院法學研究所;司法改革價值轉(zhuǎn)向:從獨立到公正[N];中國社會科學報;2009年

相關(guān)碩士學位論文 前10條

1 段穎;我國人權(quán)司法保障制度研究[D];華南理工大學;2015年

2 劉暢;法官身份保障制度研究[D];鄭州大學;2015年

3 張羽;“傳媒審判”的法理學思考[D];華東政法大學;2015年

4 寇博譚;論我國的法官員額制[D];華東政法大學;2015年

5 苗澤一;法官工作壓力研究[D];南京大學;2015年

6 丁揚;司改之殤—中國法官精英化的困境[D];蘇州大學;2015年

7 宋旭;信任重構(gòu)：當代中國國情下的審判權(quán)運行模式探索[D];中國海洋大學;2014年

8 梅盈碧;論新公共管理視野下的司法改革[D];江西農(nóng)業(yè)大學;2015年

9 姚麗麗;法官依法履職保障制度研究[D];華東政法大學;2016年

10 楊德澤;論“法庭之友”制度的本土化啟示[D];蘇州大學;2016年

本文編號：1494738