發(fā)布時間：2018-02-10 14:58

  本文關鍵詞： 司法亞文化 越軌 結構功能主義 失范理論 司法職業(yè)群體　出處：《中國政法大學》2011年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：亞文化可以有不同的分類方法,按照其主體類型來分,司法亞文化便是其中的一種。按照中國現(xiàn)今的司法體制,司法亞文化要研究的對象是公檢法等司法職業(yè)群體中的亞文化。司法文化相對于整個社會來說是亞文化,而司法亞文化相對于司法文化來說,也是亞文化。亞文化這個概念一直多是在社會學及犯罪學中使用,但將它與司法職業(yè)群體聯(lián)系起來的研究和論述還不多見。這不僅是因為文化本身的定義和理論范式很難規(guī)定,同時也是因為亞文化可能會被戴上“非主流”與“不正常”的標簽,從而不會被與司法職業(yè)群體聯(lián)想起來。但實際上,亞文化現(xiàn)象的存在有其固有的根源,也具備正向或負向的功能。正視亞文化現(xiàn)象,才能正確看待現(xiàn)今的司法職業(yè)群體中發(fā)生的各種現(xiàn)象,并從新的角度對之進行解讀。 在對司法亞文化嘗試著做出界定后,借助結構功能主義,找出司法制內(nèi)在結構的設置與司法亞文化功能之間的聯(lián)系。社會功能當然既有正向功能,也有負向功能。相比較正向功能,我們更為關注負向功能。本文通過對引起社會極大關注的“趙作�！卑讣�全過程中所表現(xiàn)出來的一些違法司法亞文化表現(xiàn)形態(tài)的闡述,總結出司法亞文化的幾大負向功能。對其負向功能的研究不僅僅是因為它們代表著當今我國司法實踐領域存在的一些重要弊端,更重要的是我們嘗試從默頓的失范理論----失范是由于傳統(tǒng)文化的價值目標與合法的制度性手段中間的沖突,對司法亞文化的負向功能,實際上也就是違法司法亞文化進行犯罪學解讀,從一個新的角度去觀察這種違法司法亞文化和中國司法制度中的種種問題。 司法亞文化概念的推出和研究有助于強調(diào)法治的實質(zhì)正義。無論是“馬錫五式審案法”還是“里心模式”,它們在遵循“以事實為依據(jù),以法律為準繩”這個大前提的基礎上,靈活的根據(jù)所處環(huán)境,利用不同的條件、環(huán)境和人力資源,基于“地方性知識”,去努力的達到一種他們認為的“公平正義”的結果。這不僅符合我國國情,也一定程度上達到了實質(zhì)公平與客觀真實的結果。但我們更應該關注的是司法亞文化與主流司法文化之間沖突產(chǎn)生的違法司法亞文化。不僅因為它們會直接侵害當事人的合法權益,影響司法職業(yè)群體的形象,更重要的是它會損害法律實體和程序上的客觀公正。本文總結出司法亞文化的三大負向功能,破壞公平正義、敵意思維與司法腐敗,并結合失范理論分析了其成因,希望最終可以對司法亞文化的負向功能產(chǎn)生的前因后果進行一個明確的梳理。
[Abstract]:Subcultures can be classified in different ways. According to the type of subject, judicial subculture is one of them. According to China's current judicial system, The subject of judicial subculture is the subculture of judicial professional groups such as Public Security Bureau, Procuratorate, Court, etc. Judicial culture is subculture relative to the whole society, and judicial subculture is relative to judicial culture. It is also subculture. The concept of subculture has always been used in sociology and criminology, but there are few studies and expositions linking it to judicial professional groups. This is not only because the definition and theoretical paradigm of culture itself is difficult to define. It is also because subcultures may be labelled as "non-mainstream" and "abnormal", so that they will not be associated with judicial professional groups. But in fact, the existence of subcultural phenomena has its inherent roots. It also has the function of positive or negative. Only by facing the phenomenon of subculture can we correctly look at all kinds of phenomena occurring in the judicial profession groups and interpret them from a new angle. After trying to define judicial subculture, with the help of structural functionalism, we find out the relationship between the internal structure of judicial system and the function of judicial subculture. There is also a negative function. Compared with the positive function, we pay more attention to the negative function. Through the elaboration of some forms of illegal judicial sub-cultural expression in the whole process of the "Zhao Zuohai" case, which has aroused great social concern, This paper summarizes several negative functions of judicial subculture. The research on their negative functions is not only because they represent some important drawbacks in the field of judicial practice in our country. What is more important is that we try to use Merton's theory of anomie as a result of the conflict between the value goal of traditional culture and the legal institutional means, and the negative function of judicial subculture. In fact, it is illegal judicial subculture to interpret criminology, from a new angle to observe this kind of illegal judicial subculture and various problems in Chinese judicial system. The introduction and study of the concept of judicial subculture helps to emphasize the substantive justice of the rule of law. Whether it is the Maxi-Wu-style trial Law or the "Lixin Model", they follow the premise of "taking facts as the basis and the law as the yardstick". Using different conditions, environment and human resources, and based on "local knowledge", to strive to achieve what they consider to be "fair and just" results. This is not only in line with the national conditions of our country, But we should pay more attention to the conflict between the judicial subculture and the mainstream judicial culture, not only because they will directly violate the judicial subculture, but also achieve the result of substantial fairness and objective truth to a certain extent, but we should pay more attention to the conflict between the judicial subculture and the mainstream judicial culture. The legitimate rights and interests of the parties, This paper summarizes the three negative functions of judicial subculture, which destroy fairness, hostility and corruption. And combined with the theory of anomie analysis of its causes, hoping that the negative function of judicial subculture can eventually be a clear combing of the causes and consequences of the negative function.
【學位授予單位】：中國政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D916

【引證文獻】

相關碩士學位論文 前1條

1 張斯琦;司法亞文化視域下司法腐敗研究[D];吉首大學;2012年

，

本文編號：1500785