The Predicament and Outlet of the Criminal Judgment
-
摘要:不同地区法院刑事裁判文书审判质效评估均注重合法与和谐而忽视合理性，文书质量评查只注重激励性评优而忽视惩戒性纠错，审判权运行注重院长、庭长对案件的审批权而忽视主审法官、合议庭对案件之决定权，上述做法是制约刑事裁判文书法律说理的三大体制机制性障碍。未来可考虑将审判质效评估定位于公正、效率、效果与合理等目标，将"依据有关说理不能得出相应结论"纳入案件质量评查指标，将合理界定主审法官、合议庭独立裁决案件的范围作为健全审判权运行机制的内容。Abstract:Judging the validity of the trial of criminal judges in different regions are concerned about the lawfulness and harmony, ignoring the rationality. The quality of the paper review only focus on the incentive evaluation and neglect the disciplinary error correction. The judicial power is paid attention to the president and the president's approval of the case. The right to ignore the trial judge, the collegiate bench of the right to decide the case, the practice is to restrict the criminal jurisprudence of the legal system of the three institutional barriers. The future may consider the trial quality assessment is located in the fair, efficient, effective and reasonable goals, "according to the relevant reason can not draw the corresponding conclusion" into the case of quality assessment indicators,will reasonably define the trial judge, collegiate bench independent case Scope as a sound mechanism for the operation of the trial.
-
Key words:
- referee instruments/
- legal reasoning/
- judicial power
-
[1] 孙万怀. 公开固然重要,说理更显公正——"公开三大平台" 中刑事裁判文书公开之局限[J]. 现代法学,2014(2):42-53. [2] 胡云腾. 论裁判文书的说理[J]. 法律适用,2009(3):48-52. [3] 顾培东. 人民法院内部审判运行机制的构建[J]. 法学研究,2011(4):3-20. -
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数:690
- HTML全文浏览量:0
- PDF下载量:420
- 被引次数:0
下载:
