【摘要】：關(guān)于民事案件中審判權(quán)和執(zhí)行權(quán)的關(guān)系,在理論界存在諸多觀點(diǎn)上的分歧,有認(rèn)為應(yīng)歸屬于同一主體,有認(rèn)為應(yīng)徹底分離,分屬不同主體。在我國(guó)民事審執(zhí)關(guān)系體制的發(fā)展歷程中,審判權(quán)和執(zhí)行權(quán)是在同一主體中相互交織,不斷磨合,但直到目前審判權(quán)和執(zhí)行權(quán)邏輯關(guān)系也未能得到徹底理順,導(dǎo)致難以適應(yīng)新形勢(shì)下司法實(shí)踐的需求,人民群眾對(duì)法院民事執(zhí)行工作怨言頗多。加強(qiáng)對(duì)民事案件審執(zhí)關(guān)系的理論研究有利于實(shí)踐過(guò)程中正確處理審判權(quán)和執(zhí)行權(quán)的邏輯關(guān)系,促進(jìn)審判權(quán)和執(zhí)行權(quán)的規(guī)范運(yùn)行。我國(guó)民事案件審執(zhí)關(guān)系在經(jīng)歷了“審執(zhí)合一”到“審執(zhí)相對(duì)分離”的不同歷史階段,但從現(xiàn)階段來(lái)看,我國(guó)現(xiàn)行的審執(zhí)關(guān)系體制具有改革的現(xiàn)實(shí)必要性和法理必要性,現(xiàn)實(shí)必要性包括了“執(zhí)行難”、“執(zhí)行亂”現(xiàn)象的亟待解決,人民法院工作理念和工作力量無(wú)法滿足現(xiàn)實(shí)需求,法理必要性包括執(zhí)行工作性質(zhì)與人民法院司法屬性的矛盾以及人民法院自裁自執(zhí)的邏輯矛盾。綜合參考國(guó)外的執(zhí)行體制模式和我國(guó)的執(zhí)行現(xiàn)狀、人民群眾的傳統(tǒng)觀念以及節(jié)約司法資源、整合行政資源的目的,我國(guó)的審執(zhí)關(guān)系應(yīng)當(dāng)采取“審執(zhí)徹底分離”的模式,即審判權(quán)由人民法院行使,而執(zhí)行權(quán)則徹底從人民法院當(dāng)中分離出來(lái),由行政機(jī)關(guān)行使。在眾多行政機(jī)關(guān)當(dāng)中,公安機(jī)關(guān)是行使執(zhí)行權(quán)的最佳主體,公安機(jī)關(guān)本身屬于行政機(jī)關(guān),擁有行政機(jī)關(guān)的特質(zhì),與執(zhí)行權(quán)的性質(zhì)相吻合,對(duì)比作為司法機(jī)關(guān)的人民法院更具有屬性優(yōu)勢(shì),同時(shí)公安機(jī)關(guān)相比其他行政機(jī)關(guān)又具有自身特點(diǎn),公安機(jī)關(guān)具有法律專業(yè)優(yōu)勢(shì),強(qiáng)制力優(yōu)勢(shì),獲取信息優(yōu)勢(shì),另外公安機(jī)關(guān)的威懾力顯然也要高于其他行政機(jī)關(guān),這些優(yōu)勢(shì)對(duì)于執(zhí)行工作都具有積極意義。由公安機(jī)關(guān)行使執(zhí)行權(quán)的同時(shí)應(yīng)對(duì)執(zhí)行權(quán)進(jìn)行進(jìn)一步細(xì)分,分為執(zhí)行裁判權(quán)和執(zhí)行實(shí)施權(quán),將執(zhí)行裁判權(quán)劃予法院,而執(zhí)行實(shí)施權(quán)則交予公安機(jī)關(guān),避免“運(yùn)動(dòng)員裁判員同體”的現(xiàn)象出現(xiàn)。由公安機(jī)關(guān)行使執(zhí)行實(shí)施權(quán)要注重制度建設(shè),包括執(zhí)行啟動(dòng)、執(zhí)行措施以及執(zhí)行監(jiān)督,確保執(zhí)行權(quán)的運(yùn)行能夠有章可循,有規(guī)可依,將權(quán)力裝進(jìn)制度的籠子里。
[Abstract]:As to the relationship between judicial power and executive power in civil cases, there are many differences of views in the theoretical circle, some think that they should belong to the same subject, others think that they should be completely separated and belong to different subjects. In the course of the development of the system of civil adjudication and enforcement in our country, the judicial power and the executive power are intertwined with each other in the same subject, but until now, the logical relationship between the judicial power and the executive power has not been completely straightened out. As a result, it is difficult to adapt to the needs of judicial practice under the new situation, and the people complain a lot about the civil execution of the court. Strengthening the theoretical study on the relationship between adjudication and execution in civil cases is conducive to correctly handling the logical relationship between judicial power and executive power in practice and promoting the normative operation of judicial and executive power. The relationship between trial and execution in civil cases in our country has experienced different historical stages from "combination of trial and execution" to "relative separation of trial and enforcement". However, from the current stage, the current system of trial and enforcement in our country has the realistic necessity of reform and the necessity of legal theory. The necessity of reality includes the phenomenon of "difficult execution" and "chaos of execution", and the people's court's working concept and work force cannot meet the actual needs. The necessity of legal theory includes the contradiction between the nature of execution and the judicial attribute of the people's court and the logical contradiction between the self-adjudication and the self-enforcement of the people's court. Referring to the implementation system model of foreign countries and the present situation of execution in China, the traditional concept of the people and the purpose of saving judicial resources and integrating administrative resources, the relationship between trial and execution in China should adopt the mode of "complete separation of adjudication and execution". The judicial power is exercised by the people's court, and the executive power is completely separated from the people's court and exercised by the administrative organ. Among the many administrative organs, the public security organs are the best subjects to exercise the executive power. The public security organs themselves belong to the administrative organs and have the characteristics of the administrative organs, which are consistent with the nature of the executive power. Compared with the people's court as the judicial organ, the people's court has the attribute advantage, and the public security organ has its own characteristics compared with other administrative organs. The public security organ has the advantage of legal specialty, the advantage of coercive power, and the advantage of obtaining information. In addition, the deterrent power of public security organs is obviously higher than that of other administrative organs. When the public security organ exercises the power of execution, the power of execution shall be further subdivided into the power of execution and the power of execution, and the power of execution shall be assigned to the court, and the power of execution shall be handed over to the public security organ. Avoid the phenomenon of "athletes referees in the same body". The public security organs should pay attention to the construction of the system, including the implementation of the start-up, the implementation of measures and the implementation of supervision, to ensure that the operation of the executive power can be governed by rules and regulations, and put the power in the cage of the system.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2016
【分類號(hào)】：D925.1

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 申保珍;6類民事案件應(yīng)先行調(diào)解[J];農(nóng)村百事通;2004年02期

2 劉維增;;淺議民事案件執(zhí)行難的成因及對(duì)策[J];民營(yíng)科技;2010年10期

3 楊鵬;;必須重視民事案件的處理[J];人民司法;1959年17期

4 ;認(rèn)真做好民事案件公開(kāi)審判開(kāi)庭前的準(zhǔn)備工作[J];人民司法;1980年07期

5 孤眾;運(yùn)用心理學(xué)常識(shí)處理民事案件的點(diǎn)滴體會(huì)[J];人民司法;1985年07期

6 李松璽，劉桂璞;民事案件當(dāng)事人勝訴心理的矯正[J];人民司法;1994年02期

7 ;民事案件當(dāng)事人對(duì)管轄權(quán)提出異議適用什么程序？[J];法學(xué)雜志;1994年03期

8 牛玉萍;民事案件應(yīng)到哪個(gè)法院起訴[J];新農(nóng)業(yè);1994年08期

9 ;向法院起訴民事案件應(yīng)具備哪些條件[J];新農(nóng)業(yè);1995年09期

10 趙學(xué)雷;;淺析刑事附帶民事案件執(zhí)行難原因及對(duì)策[J];青年與社會(huì);2013年05期

相關(guān)會(huì)議論文 前9條

1 陳玉斌;蔡?hào)|兵;;民事案件調(diào)解中的心理學(xué)應(yīng)用[A];第二屆貴州法學(xué)論壇文集[C];2001年

2 李后龍;葛文;;懷疑、信賴與民事案件材料公開(kāi)——以公眾知情權(quán)為核心的考察[A];建設(shè)公平正義社會(huì)與刑事法律適用問(wèn)題研究-全國(guó)法院第24屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄉ蟽?cè)）[C];2012年

3 王秀錦;;不應(yīng)因送達(dá)地址不準(zhǔn)確駁回原告起訴——對(duì)最高人民法院《關(guān)于適用簡(jiǎn)易程序?qū)徖砻袷掳讣娜舾梢?guī)定》第八條第(二)款的認(rèn)識(shí)[A];中國(guó)民商法實(shí)務(wù)論壇論文集[C];2004年

4 鄧志偉;陳盎然;吳亦武;;送達(dá)的選擇與選擇的送達(dá)——基于五件民事案件送達(dá)的法社會(huì)學(xué)思考[A];探索社會(huì)主義司法規(guī)律與完善民商事法律制度研究——全國(guó)法院第23屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄉ希C];2011年

5 宋凡;田勇;;民事案件對(duì)外委托鑒定工作中存在的若干問(wèn)題分析[A];當(dāng)代法學(xué)論壇（2008年第1輯）[C];2008年

6 徐偉功;黃鵬;;美國(guó)區(qū)際民事案件移送制度研究[A];2006年中國(guó)青年國(guó)際法學(xué)者暨博士生論壇論文集（國(guó)際私法卷）[C];2006年

7 葛文;;審判效能的優(yōu)化與審理時(shí)間管理——基于中級(jí)法院二審民事案件審理時(shí)間結(jié)構(gòu)的分析[A];探索社會(huì)主義司法規(guī)律與完善民商事法律制度研究——全國(guó)法院第23屆學(xué)術(shù)討論會(huì)獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撐募ㄉ希C];2011年

8 梅賢明;;“功夫茶”解開(kāi)“連環(huán)結(jié)”[A];上海市茶葉學(xué)會(huì)2007-2008年度論文集[C];2008年

9 祝家鎮(zhèn);吳家櫦;左芷津;;關(guān)于制訂我國(guó)《法醫(yī)法》的建議[A];第五次全國(guó)法醫(yī)學(xué)術(shù)交流會(huì)論文集[C];1996年

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 通訊員 嚴(yán)如國(guó);阿瓦提法院民事案件調(diào)撤率達(dá)82%[N];阿克蘇日?qǐng)?bào)(漢);2011年

2 記者 史謙 實(shí)習(xí)生 杜夢(mèng)真;去年審理商標(biāo)民事案件19815件[N];人民公安報(bào);2013年

3 記者 操秀英;我國(guó)商標(biāo)民事案件年增長(zhǎng)率超50%[N];科技日?qǐng)?bào);2013年

4 李玲 張強(qiáng);宜賓翠屏建民事案件庭前討論機(jī)制[N];人民法院報(bào);2013年

5 劉文平 郝繼武 記者 吳天雯;滴道法院刑事附帶民事案件調(diào)解率逾九成[N];雞西日?qǐng)?bào);2007年

6 邢良峰邋伊建軍;許昌二審民事案件半數(shù)調(diào)結(jié)[N];人民法院報(bào);2007年

7 胡曉瑜邋張長(zhǎng)征;刑事附帶民事案件注重調(diào)解[N];周口日?qǐng)?bào);2007年

8 通訊員 張文長(zhǎng)邋閔繼承 王樹(shù)恒;探索出“一調(diào)二理三結(jié)合”民事案件審理新思路[N];駐馬店日?qǐng)?bào);2007年

9 劉鳳英邋記者 賈旭博;齊鐵法院注重調(diào)解刑事附帶民事案件見(jiàn)成效[N];齊齊哈爾日?qǐng)?bào);2008年

10 劉津農(nóng);五成多民事案件“握手言和”[N];工人日?qǐng)?bào);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 童小婭;論民事案件執(zhí)行檢察監(jiān)督[D];華中師范大學(xué);2015年

2 鄢俊;民事案件審執(zhí)關(guān)系研究[D];江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2016年

3 曹桐銅;刑事附帶民事案件執(zhí)行機(jī)制研究[D];浙江工業(yè)大學(xué);2012年

4 馬巖;我國(guó)民事案件中的法律適用問(wèn)題研究[D];首都經(jīng)濟(jì)貿(mào)易大學(xué);2013年

5 張墨川;民事案件審判流程管理系統(tǒng)的設(shè)計(jì)與實(shí)現(xiàn)[D];廈門大學(xué);2014年

6 馬鳳祥;論我國(guó)民事案件中的憲法適用[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2007年

7 孫正英;論民事案件管理制度[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2010年

8 劉穎;上海第一特區(qū)地方法院涉外民事案件研究[D];華東政法大學(xué);2012年

9 孫磊;自由裁量權(quán)在民事案件適用中的法律問(wèn)題研究[D];北方工業(yè)大學(xué);2011年

10 張麗紅;民事案件事實(shí)真?zhèn)尾幻鳡顟B(tài)研究[D];山東大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：2380085