本文選題：國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)　切入點(diǎn)：裁決　出處：《哈爾濱工業(yè)大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：在國(guó)際司法實(shí)踐中,大多數(shù)國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)的法官均可以在判決文書(shū)后附隨不同意見(jiàn),這也是國(guó)際司法裁決的一大特色。從理論上看,少數(shù)意見(jiàn)對(duì)于法官、合議庭、判決結(jié)果以及法律理解都具有重要的價(jià)值,而從實(shí)踐來(lái)說(shuō),國(guó)際法院、前南斯拉夫問(wèn)題國(guó)際刑事法庭、歐洲人權(quán)法院的裁判文書(shū)中都附有持不同意見(jiàn)的少數(shù)法官撰寫(xiě)的個(gè)人意見(jiàn),此外,國(guó)際刑事法院、國(guó)際海洋法法庭的判決中也對(duì)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)予以公開(kāi)�？梢�(jiàn)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)是國(guó)際司法實(shí)踐中不可忽視的部分,也是國(guó)際司法制度發(fā)展的一大趨勢(shì),這說(shuō)明對(duì)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)價(jià)值的研究很有必要。 對(duì)于少數(shù)意見(jiàn)是否應(yīng)當(dāng)公開(kāi)的問(wèn)題,存在不同的觀點(diǎn),大部分國(guó)內(nèi)學(xué)者所關(guān)注的多為少數(shù)意見(jiàn)對(duì)中國(guó)司法制度的作用和影響,而國(guó)外學(xué)者對(duì)此的研究成果中多為對(duì)美國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)法院系統(tǒng)中法官的少數(shù)意見(jiàn)研究,對(duì)國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)則鮮有研究。因此,本文著眼于國(guó)際司法裁決本身,具體研究起來(lái)仍然有很大的空間。 文章首先對(duì)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)的含義、性質(zhì)、類型、公開(kāi)方式進(jìn)行了介紹。其次對(duì)國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)采納少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)制度進(jìn)行了研究,分析了它作為一個(gè)英美法系的司法制度,卻被國(guó)際司法制度所采納的原因,同時(shí)也對(duì)國(guó)際社會(huì)在少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)問(wèn)題上存在的爭(zhēng)議進(jìn)行了梳理。在研究中總結(jié)出少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)的價(jià)值,它不但確保了法官的獨(dú)立性,增強(qiáng)了法官的責(zé)任心,而且有助于合議庭在評(píng)議過(guò)程中尋求更公正、更正確、更周延的判決,并帶動(dòng)了法學(xué)界對(duì)新問(wèn)題的發(fā)掘和探討。雖然該制度價(jià)值很高,而且被國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)吸納并廣泛使用,但在實(shí)踐中仍有國(guó)家并未采用,可見(jiàn)其實(shí)施需要滿足特定的條件,首先,法官獨(dú)立性需要有所保障;其次,需要在級(jí)別較高的法院使用;第三,在那些具有憲法性意義的判決文書(shū)中公開(kāi)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)才更有助于發(fā)揮該制度的重要作用。希望通過(guò)對(duì)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)所需條件的分析,為沒(méi)有移植該制度的國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)和國(guó)家提供一個(gè)有效地參照。文章最后一部分在前文研究的基礎(chǔ)上,分析國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)引入少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)制度的啟示,在國(guó)際層面的影響在于它推動(dòng)了歐盟法院的改革進(jìn)程,聯(lián)系大陸法系國(guó)家的制度設(shè)置,可以發(fā)現(xiàn)在德國(guó)和日本,分別在聯(lián)邦憲法法院和最高法院吸收了該項(xiàng)制度。我國(guó)也可以從中得到有益的啟示,在具體操作時(shí)應(yīng)積極穩(wěn)妥,分布實(shí)施,逐步推開(kāi),目前可先從最高人民法院和高級(jí)人民法院受理的知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)、金融、商事、海事以及涉外案件開(kāi)始實(shí)施。 文章采用文獻(xiàn)分析法和比較分析法,前者著眼于國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)的基礎(chǔ)性文件——公約或規(guī)約,以及國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者的相關(guān)理論;后者在文章中多次采用,對(duì)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)的背景、方式和程度進(jìn)行比較,使分析對(duì)象的性質(zhì)更加明確,對(duì)該領(lǐng)域的發(fā)展也有著諸多的借鑒意義。 法律全球化的背景決定了法律一致的必然性,作為國(guó)際司法發(fā)展趨勢(shì)的少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)制度也逐漸由英美法系國(guó)家擴(kuò)展到大部分國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu),并滲透至尚未采納該制度的國(guó)際司法機(jī)構(gòu)及大陸法系相關(guān)國(guó)家,有理由相信該制度將會(huì)對(duì)國(guó)際國(guó)內(nèi)的司法實(shí)踐產(chǎn)生積極地影響。
[Abstract]:In the judicial practice, the majority of international judicial institutions can judge in the judgment documents accompanying different opinions, this is also a major feature of the international judicial ruling. Theoretically, the minority opinions for the judge, the collegial panel, which has important value judgments and legal understanding, from the practice, international the court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, judgments of the European Court of human rights are accompanied by a few judges dissented from the written opinion, in addition, the International Criminal Court, the International Tribunal for the law of the sea in the judgment of minority opinions. Visible minority opinion is an inseparable part of the international judicial practice, a it is a general trend of international judicial system development, the research on the value of minority opinions is very necessary.
For a few opinions on whether should be open to the public, there are different views, most domestic scholars paid more attention to the influence of Chinese and minority opinion of the judicial system, and foreign scholars research results for many of the minority opinion research judge in the United States domestic court system, research of international judicial institutions are rarely so. In this paper, focusing on the international judicial ruling itself, the concrete research still have a lot of space.
Firstly, the minority opinion meaning, nature, type, open mode are introduced. Secondly, the adoption of international judicial institutions minority opinions system were studied, analyzed it as a common law judicial system, but adopted by the international judicial system reason, also summarizes the existence of international society the problem of minority opinions on the controversy. Summed up the value of minority opinions in the research, it not only ensures the independence of judges, enhance the judge's responsibility, but also help the collegial panel in the appraisal process for a more equitable, more accurate, more comprehensive judgment, and promote and explore law of the new problem. Although the value of the system is very high, but also by the international judicial bodies absorb and widely used, but in practice there are still countries did not use visible, which needs to meet certain conditions, the first First, the judge independence needs to be protected; secondly, need to be implemented in the higher courts; third, in those with constitutional significance of the judgment documents publicly minority opinion will benefit play an important role in the system. By analysis of minority opinions required conditions, provide an effective reference no transplant the system of international judicial institutions and countries. In the last part of the article on the basis of previous research, analysis of the minority opinions system of international judicial institutions in revelation, the international level is that it promotes the European court reform process, set up the civil law countries system, can be found in Germany and Japan in the system, are absorbed in the Federal Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. China can get inspirations from, should actively and steadily, the distribution of the implementation in the specific operation, one by one At present, we can begin the implementation of intellectual property, finance, business, maritime and foreign-related cases, which are accepted by the Supreme People's court and the high people's court.
This paper adopts the method of literature analysis and comparative analysis, the former focuses on basic documents of international judicial institutions, conventions or protocols, as well as the theory of domestic and foreign scholars; the latter has been used several times in the article, the minority opinions in the background, compare the way and degree of the analysis of the nature of the object more clearly, there are many references on the development of this field.
The necessity of legal globalization background determines the legal agreement, as the minority opinions system trend of international judicial development has gradually extended to most of the countries of Anglo American law system of international judicial institutions, and penetrate to the system not yet adopted the international judicial institutions and civil law system countries, there is reason to believe that the positive impact on judicial practice of the system will be on international and domestic.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：哈爾濱工業(yè)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：D99

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王貴東;;公布少數(shù)意見(jiàn)與濫訴[J];長(zhǎng)春工業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2009年02期

2 何家弘;自由心證與認(rèn)證制度──證據(jù)學(xué)師生對(duì)話錄[J];當(dāng)代司法;1999年01期

3 萬(wàn)毅;林喜芬;;判決中的不同意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)制度研究[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2008年01期

4 馮文生;論公開(kāi)合議庭少數(shù)人意見(jiàn)[J];法律適用(國(guó)家法官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2002年12期

5 付悅余;宣海林;高翔;;合議庭少數(shù)意見(jiàn)公開(kāi)：行走在價(jià)值與現(xiàn)實(shí)的結(jié)合點(diǎn)[J];法律適用;2009年02期

6 陳界融;論判決書(shū)內(nèi)容中的法理分析[J];法學(xué);1998年05期

7 龍宗智,李常青;論司法獨(dú)立與司法受制[J];法學(xué);1998年12期

8 劉國(guó)慶;;普通法系國(guó)家司法判決中反對(duì)意見(jiàn)的成因分析與價(jià)值論綱初探[J];法制與經(jīng)濟(jì)(中旬刊);2008年12期

9 王貴東;;公開(kāi)少數(shù)意見(jiàn)相關(guān)范圍的探討[J];湖北經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2010年03期

10 劉澍,張洋;合議庭少數(shù)意見(jiàn)之公開(kāi)理論與公開(kāi)方式初探[J];海南大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王林彬;國(guó)際司法程序價(jià)值論[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2007年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 陳璐瓊;判決書(shū)公布少數(shù)意見(jiàn)的哈姆雷特難題[D];北京大學(xué);2007年

2 鄧鵬飛;刑事裁判法官反對(duì)意見(jiàn)研究[D];內(nèi)蒙古大學(xué);2009年

，

本文編號(hào)：1602878