Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)qqpublished in(发表于) 2013/11/15 12:59:17 Supreme Court jurisdiction over running the pilot reform in December will start
18 plenary session suggested that building the rule of law in China, must deepen judicial reform, accelerate 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.
Plenary session made a number of significant deployments to judicial reform, how to thoroughly understand the spirit, to grasp the real grass-roots judicial organs, to further improve the judicial system, and providing judicial guarantee for comprehensive reform? from today, our newspaper "legal concerns" column appeared to deepen the reform of Justice series.
-Reporter Yuan Dingbo
18 in the communiqué of the third plenary session, "sound operational mechanism of judicial power" was singled out, its importance was obvious.
In fact, on October 29, on effective practice, issued by the Supreme People's Court of Justice for the people and strengthen justice and constantly improving the credibility of the judicial opinions made it clear that continued to deepen the reform of trial internal operational mechanism. Subsequently, the Supreme Court issued a notice, in Shanghai, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Guangdong, Shaanxi and other provinces and cities some deepening judicial disclosure, trial run carried out by the court system's reform. It is reported that this reform will be officially launched in December this year, for a period of two years.
Supreme Law of change official today told the legal daily reporter said in an interview, pilot project main objective is to establish the judicial jurisdiction of the laws of operation mechanism, optimal allocation of judicial resources, strict implementation of a single judge, a collegial panel, the Judiciary Committee handling responsibilities, to the greatest extent to meet the people's demands for Justice, improving judicial public faith, establishing judicial authority.
Attorney attend court Committee
On November 5, the Jiangbei district people's Procuratorate Deputy Procurator-General digital CRIC Pan Xiaodong, Jiangbei district, walked into the court room. And as always, the CRIC session introduced by the Commissioner for judge of the Court of the circumstances of the case, and then discussed by the participants. Pan Xiaodong, seriously listen to the views and record points. Questions that arise throughout the discussion, he would comment in due course.
"Now, end of discussion everyone to comment on the proposed rehearing. "Jiangbei District Court President Zhou Xing Yu when organizing the final vote, Pan Xiaodong, had been skipped. In order to ensure that the courts exercise judicial power independently, procuratorial organs attending the officers could comment on the violations committed during the trial, without the right to vote. To this end, the law test, Jiangbei district, signed the agreement on the strengthening of coordination and supervision of the implementation of the views of established prosecutors send their staff to attend meetings of the CRIC mechanism.
February 2013, Jiangbei district, Ningbo city, Zhejiang Province people's Court tried to expose the inner workings of partially link the initiative to the Procuratorate on judicial power and procuratorial bodies each CRIC discussion cases are invited attend.
"Invited prosecutors to attend Audit Committee, would affect the Court justice independently according to law? reform began, many people have such worries. Trial nearly a year of practice show that prosecutors send their staff to attend meetings of the Audit Committee to discuss more formal and more structured and more just. "Zhou Xing Yu said.
During the interview, the reporter learned that, Jiangbei District Court also functions of the CRIC, Dean, Division of responsibilities clearly, President. Audit Committee discuss only determine the law applicable, including removing illegal evidence and burden of proof applicable, facts, namely evidence of comprehensive guidance on certification, implementation of direct rule. Dean, guidance and oversight of the case of the President, to leave traces in the case files.
Hu Yunteng, Director of the Research Office of supreme law told reporters that deepening the reform of operation mechanism of judicial jurisdiction is an important part of Supreme Court issued opinions clearly, which included deepening the reform of the system of the Judicial Committee, perfect composition of the Judicial Committee, clear the Commissioners of the Judicial Committee responsibilities, improving and perfecting the working rules and the rules of procedure of the Judicial Committee, supervising mechanisms, such as the establishment of the trial Committee resolution.
Case management throughout the trial were available and controllable
November 23, 2010, the Supreme Court set up trial management office, with a view to adopting a scientific and rational and effective trial management, promote the improvement of trial quality, enhance judicial credibility. In recent years, on the full reform has also been useful to explore.
Hu Yunteng said, deepening, President of trial management reforms, building homes, the right of the President in the exercise of trial management full trace system, strengthen the constraints, the right of the President in the exercise of trial management and monitoring to prevent abuse of trial management, was the reform of "plays".
In September 2008, Zhejiang all 103 courts online case, case, trial, execution and file archiving, workflow, such as transfer process, all integrated into the province's management system, individual case node data input in real time, enabling the courts at all levels the implementation of a comprehensive, dynamic and real time monitoring. This reform trial run in the Sun, working on the network monitoring performance data, quality control in the process, embodied in the judicial activity of transparent management.
"The data is ' table '. "Dong Jian, Office Director of the Jiangbei District Court told reporters that through you can see the length of trials, the data quality of what issues can be more targeted and solution. Regulatory assessment are also responsible for cases investigation, all withdraw, mediation, appeals cases will be given a second comment on investigation, special assessment search for collegiate. Case flow management is covering the case, trial, execution, and quantifiable evaluation of the whole process of letters and calls, stepping up surveillance from case to case, date, Court, judge, execution, archiving and so on each link the process nodes, until each judge of the whole Court trial work quantified management of scientific.
In Jiangbei District Court Chamber Vice President Zhou Jinjun, administers a range of evaluation system to achieve the trial trial leap from extensive management to lean management. Full tracking of cases, trial quality improves.
Data show that since 2010, Jiangbei district, the Court of first instance cases rates of development and reform on a declining trend. From January to October this year, the completion rate of 99.76% for the same period, average of 19.43 limit days, down 8.5 days, appeal rates rose 4.31%, reject rate fell back to the judgment of the second instance of 3.16%.
Grand jury model of deepening the reform of collegiate bench
Full court reform has been one focus of the Court's judicial reform.
In 2010, the Supreme law in the provisions on several issues of people's assessors participate in the trial made clear that the first instance cases involving interest groups should be composed of people's assessors and judges Panel. Judicial interpretation also stipulates that the people's assessors participate in collegiate case, is entitled to comment on the factual findings, the law applicable to independent, and independently exercise their right to vote. Jury have different opinions with the collegial panel composed of other personnel, asking the full Court referred the case to the President to decide whether or not to submit the trial Committee for discussion and decision, should justify; jury request and reasons should be included in the records of the deliberations.
President of the second Chamber of the hospital Zhou Qinna introduced, in August this year, Jiangbei District Court to try out "1+4" models of jury system, deepen the reform of collegiate bench, give the jury fact-finding ownership. 1 presiding judge to serve as the presiding judge, 4 jurors, jurors voting weight increase in the judicial organization. 4 jurors agree as long as there are 3 comments, which may be taken as a basis.
The reporter was informed that, at present, the collegial panel the mode does not apply to all cases, but only for the facts of the case disputes, social impact, or related to the ethical, legal, such as custom, industry practice relatively clear case.
"The jurors share increases in the full Court, and to enjoy the priority right to vote against the facts objectively weakened the voting rights of the judge's factual findings, also softened the jurisdiction of judges, through the rational decentralization, public displays of power in order to achieve effective control, enhances the credibility of the judiciary. "Zhou Qinna told reporters that" 1+4 "models of jury system is still at the pilot stage, the implementation of the reform will depend on reform of collegiate bench system.
Hu Yunteng, as all of the reform cannot be achieved overnight, health system reform that gave rise to the judicial power, as the trial unfolds, and actively promote the reform course will become increasingly clear.
Beijing, November 14
(Original title: Supreme law reform pilot in December will start trial runs)
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。
三中全会对司法体制改革作出了一系列重大部署，基层政法机关如何吃透精神、领会实质，进一步完善司法体制机制，为全面深化改革提供司法保障?从今天起，本报“司法关注”专栏推出深化司法改革系列报道。
□本报记者袁定波
十八届三中全会公报中，“健全司法权力运行机制”被单独列出，其重要性不言而喻。
事实上，10月29日，最高人民法院下发的《关于切实践行司法为民大力加强公正司法不断提高司法公信力的若干意见》就明确提出，继续深化审判权内部运行机制改革。随后，最高法下发通知，在上海、江苏、浙江、广东、陕西等省市部分法院开展深化司法公开、审判权运行机制试点改革。据悉，该项改革将于今年12月正式启动，为期两年。
最高法司改办有关负责人今天接受《法制日报》记者采访时表示，试点工作主要目标是建立符合司法规律的审判权运行机制，优化配置审判资源，严格落实独任法官、合议庭、审判委员会办案责任，最大程度地满足人民群众对公平正义的需求，提高司法公信，树立司法权威。
检察院派员列席法院审委会
11月5日，江北区人民检察院副检察长潘晓东走入江北区法院数字审委会会议室。和往常一样，审委会会议先由审监庭法官介绍案件情况，再由参会人员讨论。潘晓东一边认真听取大家意见，一边记录重点。整个讨论过程中产生的疑问，他会适时提出看法。
“现在讨论结束，大家对提出再审发表意见。”江北区法院院长周兴宥组织最后表决时，潘晓东却被跳过。原来为了确保法院独立行使审判权，检察机关列席人员可以对审判过程中的违法行为提出意见，但没有表决权。为此，江北区法检会签了《关于加强协调配合与监督制约的实施意见》，建立起检察院派员列席审委会长效机制。
2013年2月，浙江省宁波市江北区人民法院尝试将司法权内部运行部分环节主动向检察机关公开，每次审委会讨论案件都邀请检察机关派员列席。
“邀请检察机关列席审委会，会不会影响法院依法独立审判?改革之初，不少人有着这样的担忧。试行近一年的实践证明，检察机关派员列席使审委会讨论更规范、更严谨、更公正。”周兴宥说。
采访中，记者了解到，江北区法院还对审委会职责，院长、庭长职责做出明确划分。审委会只讨论决定法律适用，包括非法证据排除和证明责任适用，对事实认定，即证据的综合认证只提出指导意见，贯彻直接言辞规则。院长、庭长等对案件审理的指导和监督，都要在案卷中留下痕迹。
最高法研究室主任胡云腾告诉记者，深化司法审判权运行机制改革是最高法下发意见明确的重要内容之一，其中就包括深化审判委员会制度改革，完善审判委员会构成，明确审判委员会专职委员职责，改进和完善审判委员会工作规则和议事规程，建立审判委员会决议督办机制等方面。
审判管理案件全程可查可控
2010年11月23日，最高法成立审判管理办公室，以期通过科学、合理、有效的审判管理，促进提高审判质效，提升司法公信力。近年来，各地围绕合议庭改革也进行了有益探索。
胡云腾介绍说，深化院、庭长审判管理职责改革，建立院、庭长行使审判管理权全程留痕制度，加强对院、庭长行使审判管理权的约束和监督，防止审判管理权滥用，是本轮改革的“重头戏”。
2008年9月，浙江103家法院全部实现网上办案，案件立案、审判、执行及案卷归档、移送等工作流程环节，全部纳入全省统一管理系统，各个办案节点相关数据实时录入，实现对各级法院审判执行工作全面、动态和实时监控。这项改革实现审判权在阳光下运行、办案在网络上监管、质量在流程内控制、绩效在数据中体现的审判活动透明化管理。
“数据也是‘体检表’。”江北区法院审管办主任董继安告诉记者，通过数据可以看到案件审判时限、质量方面存在哪些问题，能更有针对性地提出解决方案。审管办也要负责进行案件评查，所有撤诉、调解、上诉的案件都要进行二次评查，对合议庭评议进行专项评查。案件流程管理则是涵盖立案、审判、执行、信访全过程、可量化的评估指标，加强监控从立案到分案、排期、开庭、裁判、执行、归档等各个环节流程节点，实现对整个法院直至每名法官审判工作科学量化管理。
在江北区法院民一庭副庭长周进军看来，审判管理一系列考评机制实现审判权从粗放式管理到精细化管理的飞跃。对案件全程追踪，有利于提高审判质效。
数据显示，2010年以来，江北区法院一审案件发改率呈逐年下降趋势。今年1月至10月，该院同期结案率为99.76%，平均审限19.43天，同比减少8.5天，上诉维持率同比上升4.31%，二审改判发回瑕疵率同比下降3.16%。
大陪审模式深化合议庭改革
合议庭改革一直是法院司法改革的重点之一。
2010年，最高法在《关于人民陪审员参加审判活动若干问题的规定》中明确指出，涉及群体利益等一审案件应由人民陪审员和法官共同组成合议庭审理。司法解释还规定，人民陪审员参加合议庭评议案件时，有权对事实认定、法律适用独立发表意见，并独立行使表决权。人民陪审员同合议庭其他组成人员意见有分歧，要求合议庭将案件提请院长决定是否提交审判委员会讨论决定的，应当说明理由；人民陪审员提出的要求及理由应当写入评议笔录。
该院民二庭庭长周琴娜介绍，今年8月，江北区法院试水“1+4”大陪审制模式，深化改革合议庭，赋予人民陪审员事实认定主导权。由1名主审法官担任审判长，4名陪审员参审，陪审员的表决权在审判组织中的权重加大。4名陪审员只要有3名意见达成一致，即可能作为定案依据。
记者获悉，目前，该模式并不适用于所有合议庭案件，而仅仅针对案件事实争议大、社会影响较大，或涉及伦理、风俗、行业惯例等法律关系较为清晰的案件。
“合议庭中陪审员比重加大，并享有针对事实的优先表决权，客观上弱化了法官对事实认定的表决权，也就弱化了法官的裁判权，通过合理分权、公开示权从而实现有效控权，有助提升司法公信力。”周琴娜对记者说，“1+4”大陪审制模式尚处于试行阶段，推行该项改革有赖于合议庭制度改革深入。
胡云腾表示，正如所有的改革都不可能一蹴而就，健全司法权力运行机制改革牵一发而动全身，随着试点的开展和积极推进，改革路线必将越来越清晰。
本报北京11月14日讯
（原标题：最高法审判权运行改革试点12月将启）
赞