说服与判断:审辩关系的异化及回归——以“商谈理论”为视角  

Persuasion and Judgment:Alienation and Regression of the Relationship Between the Trial and Defense:From the Perspective of “Discourse Theory”

作　　者：亢晶晶[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学法学院,北京100872

出　　处：《河南大学学报（社会科学版）》2017年第3期62-70,共9页Journal of Henan University(Social Sciences）

摘　　要：审辩关系是刑事诉讼中的一个重要问题。近年来,我国审辩关系呈现异化的趋势,司法实践中出现的审辩冲突和辩审妥协现象背离了审辩关系的应有本质,不利于律师辩护权的保障,同时也不利于司法公正的实现。十八届四中全会提出的"审判中心主义"需要审辩关系的回归。哈贝马斯的"商谈理论"为审辩关系的研究提供了新的视角和框架。审辩关系的回归需要从理念、诉讼结构和制度层面着手,在保障法官中立的基础上强化法官阐明义务,合理规制法官的诉讼指挥权,赋予律师及时声明异议的权利,提高律师的辩护技巧,使得辩护律师和法官能够有效履行说服者和中立判断者的角色。As an important issue in criminal procedure law, the relationship between the trial and defense is being alienated. In the judicial practice, the phenomena of the conflict and comprise between the trial and defense has deviated from the nature of the relationship between the trial and defense, which are not conducive to the protection of the right of lawyers, as well as the realization of judicial justice. The ＂trial-centered model＂, proposed in the eighth session of the Fourth Plenary Session, requires the regression of the relationship between the trial and defense. Jtirgen Habermas＇s discourse theory provides a new perspective for the research of the relationship between the trial and defense. The regression of the relationship between the trial and defense needs to proceed from aspects of concept structure and system, to strengthen the judges duty of clarification on the basis of guaranteeing the judge＇s neutrality, to reasonably regulate the judge＇s power of litigation command, to give the lawyer the right to claim in time, and to improve the lawyer＇ s defense skill, so that the defense lawyer and the judge can effectively perform the role of persuasion and neutral judgement.

关 键 词：审辩关系 “商谈理论” 审判中心主义 诉讼指挥权 阐明义务 

分 类 号：D925.2[政治法律—诉讼法学]