Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)左published in(发表于) 2013/11/13 7:13:41 Expert recommends the establishment of tribunals judicial invokes from similar Government
Expert recommends the establishment of tribunals judicial invokes independent from similar government jurisdiction escorts new reforms
18 third plenary session suggested that building the rule of law in China, must deepen judicial reform, speeding up the construction of fair and efficient and authoritative Socialist judicial system, safeguard the people's interests. To uphold the constitutional authority of the law, deepening reform of administrative law enforcement, prosecutorial power to ensure independent and impartial judicial power should be exercised according to law, sound judicial power operating mechanism, improve the system of judicial protection of human rights.
For the plenary session on "right to ensure independent judicial power should be exercised in accordance with the public prosecutor's Office", this reporter interviewed a number of authoritative legal experts.
Procedural law as one of the founders of new China, CUPL Professor Chen Guangzhong, a recent law later said in an exclusive interview with Xinhua, made judicial independence, judicial work to improve the party's style of leadership, and straighten out the relationship between discipline and procuratorial organs, putting the power of the authorities and the judiciary.
Director of Constitution and administrative law research center of Peking University Jiang Mingan stressed that judicial independence is one of the objectives of the reform of the judiciary, is the reform of China's economic reform, social reform and political protection.
How do I set up "independent administrative courts"
Professor Jiang Mingan, currently starting the personality of the administrative procedure law of the legislature, through the set out of the local government area of the amended law of independent administrative court.
At present, the practice of our administrative judicial administrative judicial independence is one of the biggest problems is poor, too much interference, administrative litigation system established at the time that original purpose: protecting private party's lawful rights and interests, and to monitor the executive authorities shall exercise their functions and powers, to a large extent did not come true.
Jiang Mingan said, to safeguard the independence, impartiality of administrative adjudication, through the modification of the administrative procedure law, setting up administrative courts is the best way to leave the local government area.
At the same time, courts at all levels within the "administrative" reforms, changing the presiding judge of the Court, the decisions for approval of unwritten practice, leadership cannot be a collegiate bench of the court case set the tone.
By the "Grand Chamber" final trial
Jiang Mingan said that the Judicial Committee to "Executive" and will not only listen to reports and decisions on cases, full implementation.
CRIC Grand Chamber will be established in the future. CRIC considered significant hard case needs its own proceedings, with "Grand Chamber" of the case for a final trial.
Judges of the Grand Chamber is made up of 7 to 15 members of the Judiciary Committee. Each case can be based on different areas of law of the case, by a Committee composed of members from different professional backgrounds Grand Chamber.
Grand Chamber of judicial procedure to be followed, after hearing counsel for the parties and render a decision after the debate.
Personal effects from similar Government
Vice Dean, Peking University School of law, constitutional administrative law research center of Beijing University Deputy Director Wang Xi zinc said, in our country, the Court's funding comes from the local financial, fiscal, courts are not independent.
National School of administration, said Yang Weidong, Professor of the Department of law, this Court will be subject to more or less, sometimes have to in order to protect certain legitimate interests at the expense of the rule of law. To realize judicial independence, through institutional arrangements are all factors that might interfere with the Justice ruled out.
Professor Chen Guangzhong, implementation of plenary jurisdiction procuratorial powers independently according to law exercise mental, it should reform the existing courts and procuratorates financial support mechanism, and replaced by the Central and provincial levels allocated, while taking action to the district courts, the public prosecution service personnel management away from local party committees and Governments at the same level of management to the higher party committees and government management.
Consider court funds directly allocated by the central or provincial level, rather than linked to the place. So you can pretty much make the courts free from interference from local funds or financially, increases the possibility of realization of judicial independence.
In-depth advice
Local politics and Law Committee, may not coordinate handling
Professor Chen Guangzhong said that to ensure that people's procuratorates exercise procuratorial power independently, the people's courts exercise judicial power independently, without interference from administrative organs, public organizations or individuals in; on the handling of the case must be decided by the people's procuratorates and the people's Court according to law.
Chen Guangzhong said that until now, especially in local politics and Law Committee remain in coordination on a case of local Party Committee.
Zinc said Wang Xi, should be established to try cases of local Party Committee shall not in any way interfere, or local party committees or the politics and Law Committee is a decision, coordination in place of judgement.
Professor Chen Guangzhong, should be provided in future, following cases within politics and Law Committee of coordination; case coordination to limit the scope of the nitty-gritty, the social impact of significant individual cases, and did not coordinate the evaluation of facts and evidence in a case in principle. Case coordination responsibility should be implemented, strengthen the coordination of cases responsibility, avoiding ambiguous error nor accountable.
Professor Jiang Mingan believes that party legislation to be adopted in the future clear politics and Law Committee could not ask about specific cases. Work should be in charge of the politics and Law Committee of judicial policy, management of cadres, should not interfere with cases, cannot be grouped together in a meeting of the public security, procuratorate, Court, tone, not cases under the public security, procuratorial, court instructions, instructions.
Procuratorial and discipline are not themselves a group
Chen Guangzhong said that anti-corruption efforts by the leadership of the Party Committee and discipline organization and coordination; procuratorial organs investigated and dealt with cases of corruption, the judicial authority shall obey the leadership of the Party Committee, respect and cooperation Commission for discipline inspection work.
Discipline Inspection Commission to initiate an investigation, procuratorial organs should not be involved in advance, early individual cases up to the individual to find the perimeter forensics meet, doesn't work with cases of discipline themselves an absolute mess. Once the discipline Committee investigation had ended, that constitutes a crime after transferred to the procuratorial organs, procuratorial authorities as stipulated in the criminal procedure law should be separate, independent investigation prosecution, courts should be independent and fair trials.
Discipline Inspection Commission testimonial evidence collected by the investigation materials, such as the person's confession and the testimony of a witness statement shall not be used in criminal proceedings, should be collected again by the anti-corruption investigation by procuratorial departments according to law. Only the transfer of Commission for discipline inspection of physical evidence, physical evidence, such as documents, audiovisual materials, electronic data materials, because of its irreplaceable nature can only be used in evidence from the review in accordance with law.
In judicial practice, the Prosecutor directly read out in Court of discipline record of questioning the person under investigation, "it is against the practice of procedural law. "Chen Guangzhong said.
Two trial judge put an end to "Advanced blending"
Chen Guangzhong said that in our country, the supervision is relationship between court practice, lower courts to cases dealt with the right to independent judges. Superior Court should be only through the second procedure, the procedure for trial supervision, right of review of death sentences upheld the lower court's decision and ruled that correcting errors of the lower court judgments and orders to achieve supervision.
But in practice, superior court sometimes give direction on cases before the lower courts, lower courts more often before arriving at a decision to a higher court. This is mainly because of performance, lower court judge is substituted in order to avoid appeals are often the first asked a superior court judge, then a judgment.
Upper and lower-level courts of referees should be allowed, unless the graft or clearly irresponsible. Reformulation of scientific and rational performance review approach must be to stamp out illegal practices in the trial judge asked the judge of second instance.
Special law in ancient China, seized the overall independent
The principle of judicial independence with Chinese characteristics is that independence of the courts, the public prosecution service as a whole, rather than as individual judges, the independence of the Prosecutor.
According to Chinese law, separate trial there are three main types of statutory organizations, namely, a single judge, a collegial panel and the Judiciary Committee. Full Court is the principal judicial organization, a few difficult, complex and important cases under the law were tried by a full approach to the discussion by the Commission.
In China, it is relatively independent from subordinate courts are supervised; the public prosecutor's Office is to lead a relationship between lines.
/Journalist Wang Hong Hsing Chi cartographic/Zhou Jianwen
专家建议设立大审判庭司法人财权脱离同级政府 独立审判权护航新改革
十八届三中全会提出，建设法治中国，必须深化司法体制改革，加快建设公正高效权威的社会主义司法制度，维护人民权益。要维护宪法法律权威，深化行政执法体制改革，确保依法独立公正行使审判权检察权，健全司法权力运行机制，完善人权司法保障制度。
针对三中全会提出的“确保依法独立公正行使审判权检察权”，本报记者采访了多位权威法学专家。
新中国诉讼法学奠基人之一、中国政法大学终身教授陈光中日前接受法晚记者专访时表示，审判独立的提出，有利于改善党对司法工作的领导方式，理顺纪委与检察机关的关系，理顺权力机关与司法机关的关系。
北京大学宪法与行政法研究中心主任姜明安强调，审判独立是司法体制改革的目标之一，是我国经济体制改革、社会体制改革和政治体制改革的保障。
如何实现设立“独立行政法院”
姜明安教授称，目前立法机关正在启动个性《行政诉讼法》，可通过修法设置脱离地方行政区域的独立行政法院。
目前，我国行政审判实践存在的最大问题之一就是行政审判独立性差，受干预太多，以至于当初行政诉讼制度建立时确立的目的：保护行政相对人合法权益和监督行政机关依法行使职权，在很大程度上没有实现。
姜明安说，要保障行政审判的独立、公正，通过《行政诉讼法》的修改，设立脱离地方行政区域的行政法院是最好的途径。
同时，在各级法院内部开展“去行政化”改革，改变法院院长、庭长对判决进行审批的不成文做法，法院领导不能为合议庭审案定调。
由“大审判庭”终局审判
姜明安说，审判委员会也要“去行政化”，不能只听汇报，然后对案件处理做出决定，让合议庭执行。
今后可以在审委会设立大审判庭。审委会认为重大疑难案件需要自己审理时，可以以“大审判庭形式”对该案进行终局审判。
大审判庭的审判人员可以由7至15位审判委员会成员组成。每次审案可以根据案件的不同的法律领域，由审委会不同专业背景的成员组成大审判庭。
大审判庭应遵循司法程序，在听取当事人及其律师的陈述和辩论后作出裁判。
人财物脱离同级政府
北京大学法学院副院长、北京大学宪法行政法研究中心副主任王锡锌说，在我国，法院的经费来自于地方财政，在财政上，法院是不独立的。
国家行政学院法学部杨伟东教授说，这样法院或多或少会受制于地方，有时不得不为了保护地方某些不正当利益而牺牲法治。要实现审判独立，就要努力通过制度化安排将所有可能对司法产生干扰的因素排除掉。
陈光中教授认为，要落实三中全会有关审判权检察权依法独立行使的精神，就应该改革现行的法院、检察院财政保障机制，改由中央和省两级划拨，同时逐步将地方法院、检察院的人事管理权从同级地方党委和政府管理改为由上级党委和政府管理。
可考虑法院的资金由中央或省一级直接拨付，而不与地方挂钩。这样就可以相当大程度让法院在资金或财政上摆脱来自地方的干扰，提高了实现独立审判的可能性。
深度建言
地方政法委不得协调办案
陈光中教授说，切实保证人民检察院独立行使检察权，人民法院独立行使审判权，使之不受其他行政机关、团体和个人的干涉；对案件的具体处理，必须分别由人民检察院和人民法院依法作出决定。
陈光中说，直到今日，地方党委特别是地方政法委仍然在搞协调办案。
王锡锌说，应规定地方党委对审判个案不得以任何方式加以干扰，或者以地方党委决定或政法委决定、协调来代替判决。
陈光中教授提出，今后应规定，省以下政法委不宜进行个案协调；案件协调的范围限于事关大局、社会影响重大的个别案件，而且原则上不协调案件事实和证据的评判。应实行案件协调责任制，加强案件协调工作的责任心，避免权责不清，出现错误也无法追责。
姜明安教授认为，今后要通过党内法规明确政法委不能过问具体个案。政法委的工作应该是管司法政策、管干部，不能干预个案，不能把公安、检察、法院组织到一起开会，给个案定调，不能就个案给公安、检察、法院下指示、做批示。
检察和纪委不能混成一团
陈光中说，反腐败工作由党委领导，纪委组织协调；检察机关作为查处腐败案件的司法机关，应当服从党委领导，尊重、配合纪委工作。
纪委立案调查，检察机关一般不宜提前介入，个别大要案至多单独以初查方式外围取证配合，不能与纪委办案混成一锅粥。一旦纪委调查结束，认为构成犯罪移送检察机关后，检察机关就应按刑诉法规定独立、自主地侦查起诉，法院应独立、公正地审判。
纪委调查案件所收集的言词证据材料，如受调查人的供认笔录和证人证言笔录等，不得在刑事诉讼中使用，应当由检察机关反腐败侦查部门重新依法收集。只有纪委移送的物证、书证、视听资料、电子数据等实物证据材料，由于其具有不可取代性，才可以依法审查后作为证据使用。
在司法实践中，有的公诉人在法庭上直接宣读纪委讯问被调查人的笔录，“这是违反程序法的做法。”陈光中说。
杜绝两审法官“提前勾兑”
陈光中说，在我国，法院上下级间是监督关系，下级法院对正在审理的案件有权独立作出裁判。上级法院应当只能通过二审程序、审判监督程序、死刑复核程序维持下级法院正确的判决和裁定，纠正下级法院错误的判决和裁定来实现监督。
但实践中，上级法院有时对下级法院正在审理的案件作出指示，下级法院更经常在作出裁判前向上级法院请示。这主要是因为涉及业绩考核，下级法院法官为了避免上诉案件被改判，往往先请示上级法院的法官，而后再作出判决。
应允许上下级法院不同的裁判观点，除非贪赃枉法或者明显不负责任。必须重新制定科学合理的业绩考核办法，以杜绝一审法官请示二审法官的违法作法。
特别解读我国法、检整体独立
中国特色司法独立的原则是，法院、检察院作为整体的独立，而不是作为个体的法官、检察官的独立。
根据我国法律规定，独立审判的主体有三种法定的审判组织，即独任法官、合议庭和审判委员会。其中合议庭是主要审判组织，少数疑难、复杂、重大案件根据法律是由合议庭主动提请审判委员会讨论的。
在我国，上下级法院之间是相对独立的，是监督指导关系；检察院上下级之间是领导关系。
文/记者汪红纪欣制图/周建文
赞