法院“阅核制”应当慎行——兼论审判监督管理的合理限度  

Caution about Implementing the"Review by Reading"Mechanism in Courts:The Proper Limit of Trial Supervision and Management

作　　者：龙宗智[1] Long Zongzhi

机构地区：[1]四川大学法学院

出　　处：《比较法研究》2024年第2期48-61,共14页Journal of Comparative Law

摘　　要：裁判文书阅核制实施虽有一定的现实理由、制度根据、政策背景和社会基础,但阅核制具有全面性、效力性及责任性特点。因此,其在实质上改变了“审理者裁判”的逻辑。其施行并无诉讼法依据且脱离程序保障措施,因此存在程序合法性与正当性障碍,同时可能冲撞司法责任制包括院庭长办案制度,与员额制改革逻辑不协调,且在有效性、效率性、个人干预可能性上亦存疑问。阅核制并无现代审判制度例证印证,我国其他法域的同类制度在存续多年后亦被废止。改革裁判文书签发制度,是司法责任制改革的关键环节之一,原改革方案并不极端,当下应谨慎探讨其调整。加强审判监督管理的措施,不得在一般案件中实质否定“审理者裁判,裁判者负责”这一司法核心机理。阅核制应谨慎推行,严格限于特殊案件范围,包括案件的特殊性与审判人员特殊性,且视情采取较为灵活的阅核方式,包括试行设置阅核法官。应当继续推进和落实各项保障案件质量行之有效的改革措施,包括坚持“以公开促公正”的指导思想,加大司法公开力度。The idea of"review by reading"may have certain underlying reasons,institutional basis,policy backgrounds and societal settings for supporting its implementation.However,the comprehensive nature,binding effect and accountability of"review by reading"contradict the principle that judgments should be rendered solely by the presiding judge.This mechanism lacks procedural legitimacy and justification within the framework of procedural law.Meanwhile,it contradicts the judicial accountability system,which mandates that the presiding judges and court directors handle cases in person.It deviates from the logic of a judicial system with a designated number of personnel,and raises concerns regarding its effectiveness,efficiency and personal intervention."Review by reading"is not practiced in other modern countries,and similar systems in other legal fields in China have been abandoned.The reform of signing and issuing judgments and orders is integral to the reform of judicial accountability,and the current reform plan is deemed sound and should not be altered hastily.Any reforms in trial supervision and management must uphold the basic judicial principle that"judgements should be made solely by the those who hear the case and be accountable for the decisions."Caution should be warranted in implementing the"review by reading"mechanism,and it should only be applied to specific categories of cases,considering the particularity of the cases and trial personnel involved.Flexible ways of review,such as appointing a specialized reviewing judge,should be considered.Continued efforts should be made to carry out other effective reforms to guarantee the quality of case handling,adhere to the principle of"promoting justice through transparency,"and enhance the transparency of judicial proceedings.

关 键 词：司法责任制 裁判文书 阅核 审判监督管理 合理限度 

分 类 号：D926.2[政治法律—法学]