| 随着司法制度的不断发展和完善,我国的法官责任制度逐渐形成了三种模式.其中,结果责任模式发端于错案责任追究制,后被纳入违法审判责任制,如今则被视为防范冤假错案的重要制度保证.程序责任模式滥觞于违法审判责任制,如今则成为法院进行案件质量评查、对法官确定奖惩措施的主要依据.随着新一轮司法改革的推进,法学界发出了尊重司法规律、重构法官责任制度的呼声,一种主要针对法官违背职业伦理行为来构建法官责任的新模式——职业伦理责任模式,逐渐出现在各种司法改革的方案之中.上述三种模式都是司法体制改革的产物,都有各自得以存在的制度空间,也都有相应的局限性和实施障碍.通过总结我国法官责任制度的发展经验,可以为未来法官责任制度模式的选择确立一些基本准则. |
|
With the development and improvement of the judicial system, three models of judge's responsibility system have gradually formed in China. Among them, the results responsibility model originated from the “wrong case responsibility system”, later was incorporated into the “illegal trial responsibility system”, and now is seen as a basic institutional arrangement for correcting and preventing miscarriages of justice. Procedural responsibility model, which originated from the “illegal trial responsibility system,” has now become the main mechanism for the investigation in judges' errors in handling cases and for the assessment of the quality of their handling of cases. With the start of a new round of judicial reform, the Chinese law circle is calling for respecting the rule of justice and reconstructing the judge's responsibility system. Accordingly, a new model of judge's responsibility system that concentrates on judges' violation of professional ethics begins to emerge in the theoretical discussions on judicial reform. These three models of judges' responsibility system are the products of judicial reform, with each of them having its own institutional space for its existence, as well as corresponding limitations and barriers to implementation. Through the summarization of the past three decades' experience of the development of judge's responsibility system in China, we can put forward a number of basic criteria for choosing the correct model of this system in the future.
全文详见 http://cbimg.cnki.net/Editor/2015/0924/zgfx/e0f3a59c-aaba-46ab-b031-9130f9dd627b.pdf
|