论文部分内容阅读
一、【《草案》第14条】人民检察院有权以检察建议、抗诉方式对民事诉讼实行法律监督。【建议】人民检察院有权对民事审判实行法律监督。【理由】检察建议和抗诉是人民检察院民事检察监督的具体方式,不应规定于原则性条文中,而应规定于细则中。1.对民事诉讼进行监督范围过宽,诉讼不仅是法院的活动也是当事人的活动,检察院不能对当事人的诉讼活动进行监督。检察机关监督的权限不能超过当事人的权限。在程序设置上,能够监督法院的只有当事人,当事人可以声明不服,而不服的只能是法院的判决、裁定。所以拟将民事审判活动改为民事裁判。2.监督的具体方式不适合在原则性规定中出现。可以放在再审程序中。结论:监督对象为法院,不宜用民事诉讼;应当为事后监督;检查建议和抗诉不应规定在原则性条文中。
I. Article 14 of the Draft] The People’s Procuratorate has the power to exercise legal supervision over civil actions in the form of procuratorial suggestions or protest. [Proposal] The People’s Procuratorate has the power to exercise legal supervision over civil trials. Rationale Prosecutorial proposals and protest are the specific methods of procuratorial supervision and civil procuratorial supervision and should not be stipulated in the principle clause but should be stipulated in the rules. 1. The scope of oversight of civil litigation is too wide, litigation is not only the activities of the court but also the activities of the parties, the Procuratorate can not supervise the litigation activities of the parties. Procuratorial supervision of the authority can not exceed the authority of the parties. In procedural arrangements, only the parties and the parties who can supervise the court can refuse to accept their objections and any refusal to accept them can only be the judgment or ruling of the court. Therefore, we intend to civil trial activities to civil judgments. 2. The specific method of supervision does not fit in the principle of provisions. Can be placed on retrial proceedings. Conclusion: The object of supervision is the court, which should not be used for civil lawsuits; it should be supervised afterwards; inspection suggestions and protest should not be stipulated in the principle provisions.