本文選題：法官　切入點(diǎn)：司法責(zé)任　出處：《北方工業(yè)大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文

【摘要】：法官在一個(gè)國(guó)家司法活動(dòng)中處于核心位置,法官如何行使司法權(quán)決定了司法公正是否能夠?qū)崿F(xiàn)。所以,如何構(gòu)建合理的問責(zé)機(jī)制對(duì)法官的司法權(quán)進(jìn)行規(guī)制是各國(guó)法治建設(shè)中的重要課題。從上世紀(jì)九十年代起,我國(guó)就開始自下而上地建立錯(cuò)案責(zé)任追究制,以求應(yīng)對(duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)中出現(xiàn)的冤假錯(cuò)案問題。但由于在制度設(shè)計(jì)上存在缺陷,問責(zé)效果并不理想。在新一輪的司法改革中,黨中央和最高人民法院都提出了進(jìn)一步完善我國(guó)法官司法責(zé)任制的改革方向,指出要建立以審判為中心的司法權(quán)運(yùn)行機(jī)制,并在此基礎(chǔ)上實(shí)現(xiàn)對(duì)法官審判權(quán)的監(jiān)督和問責(zé)。有鑒于此,本文從現(xiàn)行法官司法責(zé)制度的不足和如何進(jìn)一步完善我國(guó)司法責(zé)任制兩條思路出發(fā),分以下四個(gè)部分對(duì)法官司法責(zé)任制進(jìn)行探討:第一部分主要概述法官司法責(zé)任的一些基本理論問題。如界定法官司法責(zé)任的概念是什么,司法責(zé)任呈現(xiàn)出什么特點(diǎn),司法責(zé)任和其他責(zé)任有什么不同,為什要構(gòu)建司法責(zé)任制,其合理性是什么。這些基本問題的厘清有助于我們?yōu)榫唧w的制度構(gòu)建提供理論支持。第二部分主要對(duì)法官問責(zé)事由問題進(jìn)行研究。首先提出當(dāng)前制度下,針對(duì)法官行使司法權(quán)的問責(zé)事由有哪些,其中存在的問題是什么;然后對(duì)國(guó)外的法官問責(zé)事由進(jìn)行介紹的和總結(jié),以供我們研究和設(shè)計(jì)司法問責(zé)事由提供借鑒;最后提出在新的改革背景下,應(yīng)當(dāng)在司法問責(zé)事由方面做出哪些改進(jìn)。第三部分主要針對(duì)司法問責(zé)主體的設(shè)置進(jìn)行探討。首先對(duì)當(dāng)前法官問責(zé)主體的架構(gòu)和運(yùn)行作出簡(jiǎn)述,分析其中存在的不足;然后對(duì)一些法治發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的問責(zé)主體進(jìn)行比較和分析,從中總結(jié)出一些共性以供參考;最后提出設(shè)置問責(zé)主體的一些標(biāo)準(zhǔn),并就如何具體設(shè)置司法問責(zé)機(jī)構(gòu)提出構(gòu)想。第四部分主要圍繞司法問責(zé)的程序展開。首先對(duì)現(xiàn)有制度下的問責(zé)程序進(jìn)行梳理,分析在實(shí)際運(yùn)行中的缺陷;然后對(duì)一些法治發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家的法官懲戒程序進(jìn)行分析和總結(jié),歸納出他們?cè)诔绦驑?gòu)建上的基本特點(diǎn)以資借鑒;最后對(duì)具體程序的設(shè)計(jì)提出構(gòu)想。
[Abstract]:Judges are at the core of a country's judicial activities. How judges exercise judicial power determines whether judicial justice can be realized. How to establish a reasonable accountability mechanism to regulate the judicial power of judges is an important issue in the construction of the rule of law in various countries. Since the 1990s, China has started to establish the system of investigating the responsibility of wrong cases from the bottom up. In order to deal with the problem of false and false cases in reality. However, due to the defects in the system design, the effect of accountability is not ideal. In the new round of judicial reform, Both the Party Central Committee and the Supreme people's Court have proposed the direction of further improving the judicial responsibility system of judges in our country, and pointed out that a judicial power operation mechanism centered on trial should be established. On the basis of this, the author realizes the supervision and accountability of the judge's judicial power. In view of this, this paper proceeds from the deficiency of the current system of judges' judicial responsibility and how to further improve the judicial responsibility system of our country. It is divided into the following four parts to discuss the judicial responsibility system of judges: the first part mainly summarizes some basic theoretical problems of judicial responsibility of judges, such as defining the concept of judicial responsibility of judges, what characteristics of judicial responsibility, What is the difference between judicial responsibility and other responsibilities, and why should we build a judicial responsibility system? What is its rationality? the clarification of these basic problems helps us to provide theoretical support for the concrete system construction. The second part mainly studies the question of the cause of the judge's accountability. What are the reasons for the judges to exercise judicial power, and what are the existing problems, and then introduce and summarize the reasons of the judges' accountability in foreign countries, so as to provide reference for us to study and design the causes of judicial accountability; Finally, under the background of the new reform, what improvements should be made in the subject of judicial accountability. The third part mainly discusses the establishment of the subject of judicial accountability. Firstly, the structure and operation of the subject of judicial accountability are briefly described. Then the author compares and analyzes the accountability subjects of some developed countries with the rule of law, sums up some commonalities for reference, and finally puts forward some standards for setting accountability subjects. The fourth part mainly focuses on the procedure of judicial accountability. Firstly, the accountability procedures under the existing system are combed, and the defects in the actual operation are analyzed. Then the author analyzes and summarizes the judges' disciplinary procedure in some developed countries with the rule of law, and concludes their basic characteristics in the construction of the procedure for reference. Finally, the author puts forward some ideas on the design of the concrete procedure.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：北方工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號(hào)】：D926.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王迎龍;;司法責(zé)任制理論問題探析——基于“兩高”關(guān)于完善司法責(zé)任制的兩份意見[J];社會(huì)科學(xué)家;2016年06期

2 崔永東;;法官責(zé)任制的定位與規(guī)則[J];現(xiàn)代法學(xué);2016年03期

3 詹建紅;;我國(guó)法官懲戒制度的困境與出路[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2016年02期

4 陳光中;王迎龍;;司法責(zé)任制若干問題之探討[J];中國(guó)政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2016年02期

5 朱旭;;司法問責(zé)機(jī)制研究[J];中國(guó)檢察官;2016年04期

6 金澤剛;;司法改革背景下的司法責(zé)任制[J];東方法學(xué);2015年06期

7 陳瑞華;;法官責(zé)任制度的三種模式[J];法學(xué)研究;2015年04期

8 胡志斌;;司法問責(zé)基本范疇的理論界定[J];鹽城工學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2014年01期

9 楊知文;;現(xiàn)代司法目標(biāo)與中國(guó)法院審判組織改革[J];貴州大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2013年02期

10 汪貽飛;;論法官懲戒之事由[J];合肥工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：1660875