论文部分内容阅读
指导性案例社会推荐模式展示出最高法院的“民主化”姿态。由于指导性案例具有公共政策形成功能,契合了最高法院作为政治机构的需要,因此这一“民主化”动向应予以肯定,同时,指导性案例作为总结审判经验、统一法律适用的专业性司法机制,其社会推荐模式也不应在“民主化”上践行过远。就当下而言,社会推荐模式呈现出几乎被虚置的困境,这主要是受社会认知度、裁判文书公共度、指导性案例的效力和数量、推荐的层级性、决策程序的回应机制以及技术性保障机制等因素制约。此外,从比较法视角来看,案例指导制度常态运行后,社会推荐模式的功能发挥也可能会因社会主体的不同心理期待及能力产生畸变。为促进指导性案例社会推荐模式的有效运作,需要制度规范展开进一步的调整完善。
Guiding Cases The social recommendation model shows the Supreme Court’s “democratization” stance. Since guiding cases have the function of forming public policies and meet the needs of the Supreme Court as a political institution, this “democratization” trend should be affirmed. At the same time, guiding cases, as a summary of trial experience, unify the professional applicability of laws Judicial mechanisms and their social models of recommendation should not be too far removed from the “democratization.” For the time being, the model of social recommendation presents an almost virtual dilemma mainly due to social awareness, the publicity of the instrument of adjudication, the effectiveness and quantity of guidance cases, the hierarchy of recommendations, the response mechanisms of decision-making processes, and Technical security mechanisms and other factors. In addition, from the perspective of comparative law, after the case guidance system is operated normally, the function of the social recommendation model may also be distorted by the different psychological expectations and abilities of social subjects. In order to promote the effective operation of the social recommendation model in the guiding case, it is necessary for the system norms to be further adjusted and perfected.