法官责任的层次及展开  

Analysis of the Hierarchy of Judges’Responsibility

作　　者：丁亮华 Ding Lianghua

机构地区：[1]中南大学法学院

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2024年第3期208-224,共17页Global Law Review

摘　　要：司法责任制语境下的法官责任,应当从审判职责限定和职业身份限制两个维度加以界定。根据这一标准,法官责任分为办案责任和职业责任,其中办案责任依程度不同,又可区分为刑事责任、错案责任和一般违法审判责任。法官因违法审判导致裁判错误,经审判监督程序纠正后追究其责任,是法官在职责范围内对所办理案件负责的要求,不宜简单予以否定。现行规定将法官惩戒程序限定适用于故意违法和重大过失导致裁判错误并造成严重后果的情形,并不意味着法官无需对其他违法审判行为负责。法官惩戒委员会对法官违反审判职责及其主观过错的专业认定,是对原责任追究程序的有限“司法化”改造,法官惩戒与国家监察各有其制度功能与运行空间,二者并行不悖。为提高法官的公信力,有必要强调其职业伦理责任,对于违反职业伦理的“不当行为”,可以直接启动追责程序,但应当淡化其行政问责的色彩。Because of the diversity of their role composition,Chinese judges undertake multiple responsibilities.Based on their special way of performing duties and the professional characteristics of their exercise of judicial power,judges’responsibility should be defined from two dimensions:the requirements of judicial duties and the limitation of professional identity.According to this standard,the responsibility of judges can be divided into the case handling responsibility for violating judicial duties and the professional responsibility for violating professional ethics.Case handling responsibility can be further divided into criminal responsibility,responsibility for erroneous judgments,and responsibility for general illegal trials based on the degree of the illegality of the behavior and its consequences.Because Chinese judges are not passive adjudicators in purely adversarial procedures,being held accountable for wrongful judgments resulting from illegal trials is a requirement for them to be responsible for the cases they handle,which should not be simply denied.However,erroneous judgments should and can only be judgments that have been revised through trial supervision procedures.The responsibility for erroneous judgments borne by judges should also be strictly limited in terms of the composition of responsibility.The current regulations in China limit the application of disciplinary procedures for judges to situations where intentional violations and gross negligence lead to erroneous judgments and serious consequences,but this does not mean that Chinese judges cannot be held responsible for other illegal trial behaviors.In this round of judicial reform,a Judges Disciplinary Committee has been set up to be responsible for making professional judgments on judges’violation of their judicial responsibilities and their subjective faults.This is a limited judicial transformation of the existing judge’s accountability procedure,leaving room for improving the social credibility and professionalism of the punishme

关 键 词：法官责任 违法审判责任 错案责任 职业伦理责任 法官惩戒 

分 类 号：D926.2[政治法律—法学]