检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:周勇[1]
出 处:《河北工程大学学报(社会科学版)》2014年第2期67-70,共4页Journal of Hebei University of Engineering(Social Science Edition)
摘 要:作为我国独特创举的审判委员会制度,长期以来为学界所争议。总体上看,当下我国法律界对其的批评已逐渐成为主流,并且主要指向审判委员会"审判分离"、侵犯当事人诉讼权利、行政化倾向严重、责任分担不明等问题。在试图对审判委员会制度的历史沿革及现状进行剖析的基础之上,尝试提出初步的改革设想,使这一具有中国特色的诉讼制度能够符合司法审判的规律,满足司法审判实践的要求。For a long time, as an unique initiative, judicial committee system has been controversial. Overall, the present criticism from the legal profession has become a mainstream, pointing at its separation of hearing and trail, invasion of parties' litigation rights, tendency of administratization, and unclear burden of responsibility. This paper tries to analyze basic theories of Judicial Committee System, put forward some primary ideas for this Chinese characteristics of justice, expecting that the system is able to become more fair and rational.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.17