判例之外:民国裁判文书公开的复调叙事  

Beyond the Precedents: Judgment Publication in the Republic of China

作　　者：聂鑫[1] 何思萌 Nie Xin;He Simeng

机构地区：[1]清华大学法学院

出　　处：《复印报刊资料（法理学、法史学）》2023年第4期74-86,共13页JURISPRUDENCE AND HISTORY OF LAW

基　　金：清华大学自主科研计划“中国司法制度的传承与创新”(项目编号:2022THZWJC18)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：民国时期的裁判文书公开集中于中央和地方司法或司法行政机关发行的司法公报及审判机关出版的刊物上。这些刊物上所刊登的裁判文书与原本无异,选取的案件具有一定代表性,是当时法学研究的一手材料。此类裁判文书公布后,引起了多方关注,地方司法公报转载中央发布的判例要旨、法学家收集汇编裁判文书、法官和律师在案件审理中援引案例,形成了由多层级法律机关、多类型法律职业共同参与的“复调叙事”。在发挥判例的审判指导功能之外,裁判文书的公开建构起了中央与地方、审判机关与法律研究者对部分典型案件的共识,使裁判文书的书写风格完成近代化转向,推动了法学研究的深入,有效地促进了审判质量的提高与国家司法的统一。In the period of the Republic of China,judicial judgments were mostly published on judicial bulletins issued by central or local judiciaries or on judicial journals published by courts.The published version was the same as the original one,but only those typical judgments with research value could be selected.At that time,these official published judgments cherished by scholars and practitioners as firsthand materials.These judgments attracted wide public attention.The local judicial bulletins reprin ed the precedents issued by the Supreme Court,jurists collected and studied the judgments,and judges and lawyers quoted the judgments in the trial,creating a"polyphony narrative"of the judgment publication system while involving central and local levels'legal institutions and various types of legal professions.Besides serving as the judicial guiding function for trials,publication of judgements built a consensus between the central and local governments,judicial organs and legal researchers,modernized the writing style of Judgments,promoted legal study,and effectively enhanced judicial unification across the nation.

关 键 词：司法公报 裁判文书公开 判决例 司法统一 

分 类 号：D929[政治法律—法学]