论审判委员会制度的改革——以我国台湾地区大法官会议制度为鉴  

On the Reformation of the Trial Committee System:in View of the Chancery System

作　　者：魏胜强[1] 

机构地区：[1]郑州大学法学院,河南郑州450001

出　　处：《河南大学学报（社会科学版）》2013年第3期71-78,共8页Journal of Henan University(Social Sciences）

基　　金：河南省高等学校青年骨干教师资助计划项目"法律方法视域下的司法制度建设研究"(2012GGJS-019)阶段性成果

摘　　要：职权不明确、侵犯当事人的诉讼权利和助长司法解释合法化,是我国审判委员会制度的主要弊端。目前,一些学者提出的废除和改革审判委员会制度的主张都不可行。审判委员会制度和我国台湾地区的大法官会议制度非常接近,我国应当借鉴大法官会议制度,取消最高人民法院以外所有法院的审判委员会,使法官在个案中掌握法律解释权,并把最高人民法院审判委员会改组成专门的法律解释机构,统一行使法律解释权。Blurry authority, infringing the rights of litigants and legalizing judicial interpretation are the major abuses of the trial committee system. The opinion proposed by current scholars such as abolishing and reforming the trial committee system are infeasible. Trial committee system in the mainland of China is close to the chancery system in Taiwan of China, so we can refer to the chancery system, abolishing the trial committee of all levels of the courts except the supreme court. Thus the judge holds the power of legal interpretation, at the same time, the trial committee of the supreme court is turned into a special legal interpretation organization which makes unitive legal interpretation all by itself.

关 键 词：审判委员会 大法官会议 法律解释 

分 类 号：D925[政治法律—诉讼法学]