本文關鍵詞： 執(zhí)行難 拒執(zhí)罪 刑罰 信仰　出處：《華東政法大學》2014年碩士論文　論文類型：學位論文

【摘要】：我國的老百姓從封建社會的“畏訟”逐漸發(fā)展到如今的“唯訟”,加上打官司的成本大幅下降,一旦遇到矛盾糾紛,和解不成就找法院解決。這就導致了人民法院受理各類案件逐年激增,未自動履行判決義務進入執(zhí)行程序的案件數(shù)量也隨之膨脹,隨之執(zhí)行難問題愈發(fā)嚴重,人民法院認識到此頑癥系一個由于社會誠信缺失、市場監(jiān)管缺位、司法懲戒乏力造成的綜合性社會問題”,然而無論是社會信用體系的完善,還是執(zhí)行措施的創(chuàng)新對于破解“執(zhí)行難”均是治標之策,破解執(zhí)行難,最終要歸結到公民法律信仰的水平的提高。在一個法治化水平較高的國家里,公民有著較高水平的法律信仰,那么司法權威自然地得到尊崇。傳統(tǒng)政體民眾法律信仰水平的提高是一個被動、長期、循序漸進的過程。因此通過提高法律適用的威懾力,迫使民眾知法、守法從而最終提高民眾的法律信仰水平是破解執(zhí)行難的一個重要的司法出路。 而執(zhí)行工作中加大對刑罰的適用就能夠重塑執(zhí)行威懾,即足以對被執(zhí)行人產(chǎn)生懲戒、教育作用,又能提高公民的法律信仰水平。但實踐中對刑罰(拒執(zhí)罪)的適用遭遇了瓶頸,原因是拒執(zhí)罪適用程序被擱置,形同虛設；存在重強制執(zhí)行措施輕刑事制裁的傾向；刑罰的缺位致執(zhí)行強制力弱化。外部原因則是制度上的缺陷和司法者對待拒執(zhí)罪的消極與不力。為了能讓刑罰在執(zhí)行工作中發(fā)揮作用,需要理順和領會拒執(zhí)罪罪名的立法本意,建構有效的追究被執(zhí)行人拒不履行義務刑事責任的相關規(guī)則和懲戒體系網(wǎng)絡；需要完善拒執(zhí)罪的追訴方式、明確認定標準、降低追訴程序的門檻,來確保執(zhí)行中刑罰的有效回歸。 2014年是司法改革大年,司法者應順應改革大潮,大膽創(chuàng)新,攻堅克難。須整合司法資源,合理安排職務,提高辦案效率。嘗試轉變司法警察隊伍單一職能,參與到執(zhí)行工作中去；賦予司法警察特定的立案偵查權,逐步解決追訴拒執(zhí)罪立案難、舉證難的窘境。未來司法之路,在對于拒執(zhí)罪的適用和追訴,多管齊下,必定會越來越順暢。另外,橫向比較其他國家,對于拒執(zhí)行為的處理,多數(shù)歸入“藐視法庭罪”的范疇。而在國內(nèi),短期內(nèi)立法上無訂立此罪的條件,只能期待并呼喚刑罰的合理回歸,在實踐中加大拒執(zhí)罪適用,對乏力的司法懲戒手段及時補位。
[Abstract]:The common people in our country have gradually developed from "fear of litigation" in feudal society to "only litigation" now, and the costs of litigation have dropped substantially, once they encounter contradictions and disputes. Reconciliation does not achieve to find a court to resolve. This led to the people's court to accept a variety of cases increased year by year, the number of cases that did not automatically perform the judgment obligations into the execution process has expanded, and the problem of enforcement becomes more and more serious. The people's court recognizes that this stubborn disease is a comprehensive social problem caused by the lack of social integrity, the absence of market supervision, and the lack of judicial discipline ", however, whether it is the perfection of the social credit system. Or the innovation of executive measures is the strategy to solve the problem of "execution difficulty", and the difficulty of solving the problem comes down to the improvement of the level of citizens' legal belief, in a country with a higher level of rule of law. Citizens have a higher level of legal faith, so judicial authority is naturally respected. The improvement of the level of legal belief of the people in the traditional regime is a passive, long-term. Therefore, it is an important judicial way to solve the problem by increasing the deterrent of law application, forcing people to know the law, and finally improving the level of people's legal belief. And the implementation of the work to increase the application of penalties can reshape the implementation of deterrence, that is, sufficient to the execution of disciplinary, educational role. But in practice, the application of penalty (refusing to hold the crime) encountered a bottleneck, because the application procedure of refusing to hold the crime was put on hold, and it was virtual. There is a tendency to put more emphasis on enforcement measures than on criminal sanctions; The absence of penalty weakens the enforcement force. The external reasons are the defects in the system and the negative and weak treatment of the judiciary in order to enable the penalty to play a role in the implementation of the work. It is necessary to straighten out and understand the legislative intent of refusing to commit a crime, and construct an effective network of relevant rules and disciplinary system for investigating the executors' refusal to fulfill their obligations. To ensure the effective return of penalty in execution, it is necessary to perfect the prosecution mode of refusing to hold the crime, to clearly identify the standard and to lower the threshold of prosecution procedure. 2014 is the great year of judicial reform, the judiciary should comply with the tide of reform, bold innovation, difficult to overcome the difficulties, must integrate judicial resources, reasonable arrangement of duties. Improve the efficiency of handling cases. Try to change the single function of the judicial police force, participate in the implementation of the work; To give the judicial police a specific power to file and investigate, gradually solve the difficulty of filing the case against prosecution, proof difficult situation. The way of future justice, in the application and prosecution of refusing to hold the crime, multi-pronged approach. It is bound to become smoother. In contrast to other countries, most of the cases of refusal to act fall under the category of "contempt of court". In the domestic legislation, there are no conditions for such an offence to be established in the short term. We can only expect and call for the reasonable return of punishment, increase the application of refusing to hold the crime in practice, and make up the lack of judicial punishment in time.
【學位授予單位】：華東政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2014
【分類號】：D925.1;D924.3

【參考文獻】

相關期刊論文 前2條

1 邱興隆;撩開刑罰的面紗——刑罰功能論[J];法學研究;1998年06期

2 郭兵;;對完善拒不執(zhí)行判決、裁定罪追訴程序的一點看法[J];人民司法;2011年23期

，

本文編號：1446908