专业陪审员制度探要  

Exploring the System of Expert Jurors

作　　者：李响[1] Li Xiang(School of Civil and Commercial Economic Law,China University of Political Science and Law,Beijing 100022,China)

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学民商经济法学院,北京100022

出　　处：《东方论坛—青岛大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第6期131-142,共12页Eastern Forum（JOURNAL OF QINGDAO UNIVERSITY）

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重点项目“以人民为中心的民事司法程序前沿问题研究”(20AZD118)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：2023年7月27日,最高人民法院发布了《关于具有专门知识的人民陪审员参加环境资源案件审理的若干规定》,这标志着经历多年实践探索以后,专业陪审员制度终于在我国正式落地。然而,当初最高人民法院在人民陪审员制度改革试点情况报告中对专业陪审员制度暂不规定的表态言犹在耳,而且客观条件并没有发生显著改变,此时出台这项司法解释委实过于操切:专业陪审员制度不仅于法无据,上位法并不支持将人民陪审员分为普通和专业的做法;而且于情不合,凸显了陪审员人民性与精英性的内在冲突;更加于理相悖,在必要性与合理性两个层面均有所欠缺。因此,目前宜严控专业陪审员制度的适用,待《人民陪审员法》修改以后再定夺其存废去留问题。On July 27,2023,the Supreme People's Court issued the Provisions on People's Assessors with Specialized Knowledge Participating in Environment and Resource Case Trials,marking the formal establishment of the expert juror system in China after years of practical exploration.However,the Supreme People's Court had previously expressed that there would be no regulations on the expert juror system in its report on the pilot reform of the people's assessor system,and the objective conditions have not significantly changed.The issuance of this judicial interpretation at this time appears to be overly hasty:the expert juror system lacks legal basis,as the higher law does not support the division of people's assessor into ordinary and expert categories.It also conflicts with the inherent tension between the people's nature and elitism of jurors;furthermore,it is logically flawed,lacking both necessity and rationality.Therefore,it is advisable to strictly control the application scope of the expert juror system and to determine its future existence before the amendment of the People's Assessor Law.

关 键 词：人民陪审员 专门知识 环境资源案件 专业陪审员 

分 类 号：DF8[政治法律—法学]