消失中的积极释明  

Disappearing Positive Interpretation

作　　者：严仁群[1] Yan Renqun

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院,南京210093

出　　处：《复印报刊资料（诉讼法学、司法制度）》2023年第11期82-94,共13页Procedural Law And Judicial Systems

摘　　要：释明制度近期遭遇了严重危机,因为两个重要的积极释明规范在修订《证据规定》和《借贷纠纷规定》时被废弃了。释明是法官的职权行为,就此而言,两次修法的方向迥异:前者削弱了法官的职权,是一种退却;后者则强化了法官的职权,是一种超越。前者有削弱法官维护实质正义的能力,背离保护权利的法定任务等问题,而且新条文无意义或无从实施。此修法主要源自对法官中立与平等原则的错误理解,以及缺乏对预备合并或选择合并的了解并误以为存在无解的实务难题。后者从保护权利等角度看有一定的正当性,但向诉的追加方向释明同样可保护权利并避免再诉,所以此修法欠缺必要性,也欠缺法的统一适用方面的考量。消除危机的路径是修正式回归旧法。The elucidation system has suffered a heavy blow recently,because the two important positive elucida-tion norms were abandoned when revising the Evidence Provisions and the Loan Dispute Provisions.Elucidation is the act of the judge's authority.In this regard,the direction of the two amendments is quite different:the former weakens the judge's authority,which is a kind of retreat;The latter strengthens the functions and powers of judges,which is a kind of transcendence.The former weakens the judge's ability to maintain substantive justice,deviates from the legal task of protecting rights,and the new provisions are meaningless or impossible to implement.This amendment mainly stems from the misunderstanding of the principle of neutrality and equality of judges,as well as the lack of understand-ing of the solution to practical problems.The latter has certain legitimacy from the perspective of protecting rights.But because that the explanation on the direction of the claim joinder can also protect the rights and avoid further litiga-tion,this revision is unnecessary,there is also a lack of consideration for the unified application of the law.The path to eliminating the crisis is a modified return to the old provisions.

关 键 词：积极释明 保护权利 诉的追加 法官中立 平等原则 

分 类 号：D925.1[政治法律—诉讼法学]