【摘要】：現(xiàn)階段,隨著我國(guó)社會(huì)改革的不斷發(fā)展,社會(huì)上的民間矛盾和糾紛不斷涌現(xiàn),各種各樣的新型糾紛和案件數(shù)量呈幾何式增長(zhǎng),令法院應(yīng)接不暇,案件多人員少以及處理專業(yè)化極強(qiáng)案件的難度之大都成為了法院目前亟需解決的問(wèn)題。自上世紀(jì)九十年代以來(lái),社會(huì)調(diào)解與糾紛解決機(jī)制之間的矛盾日益加劇,一方面,以人民調(diào)解為代表的非訴訟糾紛解決機(jī)制逐漸衰落,而法院受理的訴訟案件卻日益猛增,積案現(xiàn)象十分嚴(yán)重；另一方面,有限的司法資源又無(wú)法滿足及時(shí)解決日益增長(zhǎng)的民間糾紛的需求。糾紛沖突的解決需求與司法資源的供給不足之間形成了尖銳的矛盾,而一旦社會(huì)上的矛盾沖突無(wú)法及時(shí)化解就會(huì)演變成激烈的對(duì)抗,從而影響社會(huì)的和諧與穩(wěn)定。目前,訴訟、調(diào)解與仲裁構(gòu)成了我國(guó)民事糾紛解決的主要方式,每一種解決方式各有千秋,如何使人民法院和民間調(diào)解機(jī)構(gòu)利用有限的司法資源在構(gòu)建和諧社會(huì)過(guò)程中發(fā)揮應(yīng)有的作用,發(fā)揮人民法院的司法保障職能,有效地處理社會(huì)糾紛問(wèn)題,成為我們必須正視并加以解決的重大問(wèn)題。 人民調(diào)解和訴訟都屬于糾紛解決機(jī)制,其中人民調(diào)解利用其民間性、自治性的優(yōu)勢(shì)參與糾紛解決,而訴訟則利用其公權(quán)性和強(qiáng)制性發(fā)揮作用,雖然兩者的矛盾處理方式不同,但在解決社會(huì)矛盾糾紛、維護(hù)社會(huì)發(fā)展秩序的穩(wěn)定等方面都發(fā)揮著突出作用。實(shí)踐證明,構(gòu)建人民調(diào)解和訴訟相銜接的多元化糾紛解決機(jī)制,并使民間調(diào)解,法院調(diào)解,仲裁等糾紛解決方式與訴訟制度相互銜接與協(xié)調(diào),對(duì)于我國(guó)現(xiàn)階段的司法體制改革和保障全社會(huì)公平正義具有十分重要的促進(jìn)作用。 目前,各國(guó)普遍重視加強(qiáng)以人民調(diào)解為代表的替代性糾紛解決機(jī)制(Alternative Dispute Resolution,簡(jiǎn)稱ADR,下同)的發(fā)展,各國(guó)法院普遍開(kāi)始對(duì)訴訟程序?qū)嵭兴痉ǹ刂?鼓勵(lì)糾紛當(dāng)事人以非訴訟方式來(lái)解決他們之間的糾紛,目的就是為了節(jié)省司法資源,減輕當(dāng)事人的訴訟負(fù)擔(dān),推進(jìn)訴訟程序的改革,提高訴訟效率,保障社會(huì)公平正義。而作為ADR的杰出代表,有著“東方經(jīng)驗(yàn)”之稱的人民調(diào)解制度也應(yīng)當(dāng)發(fā)揮其相關(guān)的作用。本文通過(guò)對(duì)我國(guó)的人民調(diào)解與訴訟制度銜接的實(shí)際狀況加以分析并借鑒國(guó)外的研究成果,從理論和實(shí)踐兩方面對(duì)人民調(diào)解與訴訟制度的銜接機(jī)制進(jìn)行全面、深入地研究與探討。 本文除引言和結(jié)語(yǔ),共分為四個(gè)部分： 第一部分是對(duì)人民調(diào)解制度的概述,作為研究人民調(diào)解和訴訟制度銜接的必要鋪墊,這一部分主要介紹了人民調(diào)解制度的相關(guān)概念和歷史沿革,并對(duì)其特點(diǎn)和工作原則加以概括,另外還總結(jié)了人民調(diào)解與訴訟制度銜接的發(fā)展歷程,從調(diào)解與訴訟兩方面提出了推進(jìn)訴調(diào)銜接的必要性。 第二部分是對(duì)國(guó)外替代性糾紛解決機(jī)制(ADR)的介紹,目前一些世界其他國(guó)家和地區(qū)的替代性糾紛解決機(jī)制與我國(guó)特有的人民調(diào)解制度有很多相似之處,即都是在第三方的主持下以非訴訟方式解決糾紛。此部分考察了歐美各國(guó)、日本以及我國(guó)臺(tái)灣地區(qū)的以“調(diào)解”“調(diào)停”制度為代表的ADR的立法研究,并對(duì)其在訴訟調(diào)解銜接制度的規(guī)定加以探討,以期對(duì)我國(guó)訴訟調(diào)解制度銜接起到借鑒作用。 第三部分是以福建莆田、山東德州、四川和云南等地區(qū)為例,對(duì)我國(guó)人民調(diào)解和訴訟銜接機(jī)制的現(xiàn)狀進(jìn)行實(shí)證分析,詳細(xì)闡述我國(guó)各地訴調(diào)銜接制度在糾紛解決方面的特點(diǎn)。 第四部分是對(duì)我國(guó)人民調(diào)解和訴訟制度銜接的的完善研究。從我國(guó)的訴調(diào)銜接機(jī)制現(xiàn)狀與不足出發(fā),借鑒國(guó)外有益經(jīng)驗(yàn),對(duì)人民調(diào)解和訴訟制度的銜接機(jī)制提出可行性分析,提出通過(guò)設(shè)置訴前調(diào)解程序、完善配套保障機(jī)制等對(duì)其加以改進(jìn),構(gòu)建出符合國(guó)情,適應(yīng)時(shí)代的訴調(diào)銜接機(jī)制。
[Abstract]:At this stage, with the continuous development of social reform in our country, the civil contradictions and disputes in the society are constantly emerging, and the number of various new disputes and cases has been increasing geometrically, which makes the court unable to take care of the court, the number of cases and the difficulty of handling the highly specialized cases has become the urgent problem that the court needs to solve at present. Since the 90s of the century, the contradiction between the social mediation and the dispute settlement mechanism has been increasingly intensified. On the one hand, the non litigation dispute settlement mechanism, represented by the people's mediation, has gradually declined, while the litigation cases accepted by the court are increasing rapidly, and the accumulated cases are very serious; the other side, the limited judicial resources can not meet the timely solution. The demand for increasing civil disputes has formed a sharp contradiction between the demand for resolving disputes and the shortage of judicial resources, and once the conflict in society cannot be resolved in time, it will evolve into a fierce confrontation, thus affecting the harmony and stability of the society. The main ways to solve these problems are different. How to make use of the limited judicial resources to play their due role in the process of building a harmonious society, to play the judicial guarantee function of the people's court and to effectively deal with the problems of social disputes, we must face and solve the problem. Big problem.
The people's mediation and litigation belong to the dispute settlement mechanism, in which the people's mediation takes advantage of its folklore and autonomy to take part in the dispute resolution, while the litigation uses its public power and the mandatory role, although the two ways of dealing with the contradictions are different, but they are all responsible for solving the disputes of social contradictions and maintaining the stability of the social development order. In practice, it has proved that the construction of a diversified dispute settlement mechanism which is connected with the people's mediation and litigation has made the civil mediation, court mediation, arbitration and other disputes solving methods connected and coordinated with the litigation system. It has a very important promotion to the reform of the judicial system at the present stage and the protection of the fair and justice of the whole society. Use.
At present, every country attaches great importance to the development of the alternative dispute resolution mechanism (Alternative Dispute Resolution, ADR, and the following), which is represented by the people's mediation. The courts of all countries have generally begun to carry out judicial control of the proceedings and encourage the parties to settle their disputes by non litigation. The purpose is to save the company. Legal resources can reduce the litigant's burden of litigation, promote the reform of litigation procedure, improve the efficiency of the lawsuit and guarantee the social justice and justice. As an outstanding representative of ADR, the people mediation system, called "Eastern experience", should also play its related role. This article through the actual situation of the connection of the people's mediation and litigation system in our country. By analyzing and drawing on the research achievements of foreign countries, from the two aspects of theory and practice, the connection mechanism of the people's mediation and litigation system is thoroughly studied and discussed.
In addition to the introduction and conclusion, this article is divided into four parts.
The first part is the summary of the people's mediation system, as the necessary paving for the study of the connection between the people's mediation and the litigation system. This part mainly introduces the related concepts and historical evolution of the people's mediation system, summarizes its characteristics and working principles, and also summarizes the development course of the connection between the people's mediation and the litigation system. The two aspects of solution and litigation put forward the necessity of promoting the connection between litigation and mediation.
The second part is the introduction of the alternative dispute settlement mechanism (ADR) abroad. At present, the alternative dispute settlement mechanism of some other countries and regions in the world has many similarities with the unique people's mediation system in our country, that is, to resolve disputes by non litigation under the auspices of the third party. This part examines the European and American countries and Japan. The Legislative Research on ADR, represented by the "mediation" and "mediation" system in the Taiwan area of China, and discusses the provisions of the system of mediation and connection in litigation, in order to play a reference role in the connection of our country's litigation mediation system.
The third part, taking Fujian Putian, Shandong Dezhou, Sichuan and Yunnan as an example, makes an empirical analysis of the current situation of the mediation and litigation mechanism of our people's mediation and litigation, and expounds the characteristics of the dispute settlement system in all parts of our country.
The fourth part is the perfect study of the connection between the Chinese people's mediation and the litigation system. From the current situation and deficiency of our country's mediation mechanism, the feasibility analysis of the connection mechanism of the people's mediation and litigation system is put forward by using the useful experience of foreign countries for reference. In addition, we should build up a mechanism of linking up with the national conditions and adapting to the times.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：昆明理工大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 趙明霞;吳孝卿;;淺議民事糾紛委托人民調(diào)解[J];中國(guó)司法;2007年06期

2 劉晶晶;;建構(gòu)中國(guó)民事訴訟中司法性 ADR 的審視與思考[J];法律適用;2006年03期

3 章武生;司法ADR之研究[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2003年02期

4 黎文;杜曉旭;;英國(guó)《民事訴訟規(guī)則》對(duì)ADR的支持與發(fā)展[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年21期

5 陳曉暉;;論構(gòu)建審調(diào)分離下的人民調(diào)解制度[J];法制與社會(huì);2009年01期

6 謝俊;;我國(guó)民事司法改革中的“三大失衡”與破解[J];廣東行政學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2009年03期

7 柯陽(yáng)友;高玉珍;;訴訟內(nèi)外糾紛解決機(jī)制的分流、協(xié)調(diào)與整合[J];河北法學(xué);2006年08期

8 胡學(xué)軍;丁喜春;;名存實(shí)亡的民事訴訟制度及其檢討[J];前沿;2006年12期

9 種若靜;;英國(guó)民事訴訟規(guī)則與替代性糾紛解決機(jī)制(ADR)[J];人民調(diào)解;2004年05期

10 徐黎明;;民事訴訟審前分流——構(gòu)建化解糾紛的多重機(jī)制[J];山西高等學(xué)校社會(huì)科學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2009年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 陳正偉;后現(xiàn)代法學(xué)視角下的ADR研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2006年

2 宋明;人民調(diào)解糾紛解決機(jī)制的法社會(huì)學(xué)研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2006年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 談芳;人民調(diào)解與訴訟銜接機(jī)制研究[D];河南大學(xué);2011年

2 楊嚴(yán)炎;司法ADR研究[D];河南大學(xué);2003年

3 任麗莉;ADR與重塑有中國(guó)特色的人民調(diào)解制度[D];鄭州大學(xué);2005年

4 孫敏潔;論美國(guó)法院附設(shè)ADR[D];武漢大學(xué);2005年

5 王彩君;論ADR在我國(guó)的完善[D];山西大學(xué);2006年

6 吳瓊;論人民調(diào)解與訴訟程序相銜接的理論與實(shí)踐[D];對(duì)外經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2006年

7 沈莉萍;論基層人民法院附設(shè)ADR[D];華東政法學(xué)院;2006年

8 郭曉鋒;人民調(diào)解的探究與重構(gòu)[D];河南大學(xué);2007年

9 范光萍;論現(xiàn)代民事糾紛調(diào)解機(jī)制的重構(gòu)[D];蘇州大學(xué);2007年

10 劉維鶴;我國(guó)農(nóng)村代替性糾紛解決機(jī)制的調(diào)研報(bào)告[D];蘭州大學(xué);2008年

，

本文編號(hào)：2121200