庭审实质化改革背景下法官庭前阅卷制度反思  

Reflections on the System of Judge's Previewing Case Records Before Court in the Context of Substantiation of Court Hearing

作　　者：石凌云 SHI Lingyun(Wenjiang District People＇ s Court, Chengdu Siehuan, 611130, China)

机构地区：[1]四川省成都市温江区人民法院,四川成都611130

出　　处：《西南石油大学学报（社会科学版）》2016年第6期51-56,共6页Journal of Southwest Petroleum University(Social Sciences Edition)

摘　　要：在庭审实质化改革试点中,有的法院曾尝试要求除程序法官以外的其他合议庭成员在庭前不阅卷,以此来避免庭前预断。实际试点中,法官仍倾向于在庭前通过阅卷进行诉讼准备。其原因主要包括:以技术性改革为内容的"庭审实质化改革"决定了审判阶段应当充分了解侦查阶段的工作成果,我国现行规范对书面证言证据能力及证明力持肯定态度,审判长需要借助卷宗所载信息来主持庭审,司法环境、法检关系、法官办案制度也要通过庭前阅卷来保障案件实体真实。庭前阅卷并不当然导致不利于被告人的"预断"产生,应当视为开庭前对案件信息的"预知"而非"预断"。实质化的庭审制度设计才是落实以审判为中心制度改革、防止"预知"与"预断"的同一性、促进案件公正审判、发现案件的客观真实的有效路径。In the pilot reform of substantiation of court hearing,some courts required members of collegial panel other than the procedural judge not to preview case records before court,in order to avoid the pretrial judgment. However,the judge tended to preview records before court to get prepared for court trials. Their reasons for so doing are as follows：the reform of the court trial is focusing on the trial procedure,which requires the judge to have a full understanding of investigation results before the trail. China’s current law holds a positive attitude to written testimony and evidence. The presiding judge needs information from case files to preside a trial,and laws and regulations on judicial environment,on prosecution-court relationship,and on judge’s handling of cases also require case record previewing before court to guarantee justice in court trials. Previewing records before court does not necessarily lead to a disadvantaged result for the defendant,it should be conducted for“precognition”of case information but not as a“prejudgment”. A well designed court trial system can contribute to a successful trial-centered reform,to distinguishing“precognition”from“prejudgment”,and to promoting fair trial and discovering the truth of a case.

关 键 词：庭审实质化 庭前阅卷 庭前预断 庭前预知 起诉状一本主义 

分 类 号：DF73[政治法律—诉讼法学]