论文部分内容阅读
刑事判决说理问题一直没有得到实质性改善,是因为我国诉讼档案的格式化规训、以案卷为中心的诉讼方式导致了刑事裁判理由内容虚化,同时诉讼档案副卷保密制度使公众无法得知判决形成的真正原因,这使得判决说理无法实现“保障、说明、审查”功能而陷入困境。而替代性措施如“法官后语”、“判前说理”、“判后答疑”以及在判决理由中公开合议庭少数意见等说理方式均无法从根本上解决问题。要改变这种局面,仅依靠法官个人的努力是远远不够的。只有改革刑事裁判文书样式,以案卷为中心的诉讼模式彻底转变为以审判为中心,判决说理的实质公开,提升法律方法和技术的适用,判决说理的目标作用才可能真正实现。
The problem of criminal adjudication has not been substantially improved because of the formatting discipline of our litigation files and the lawsuit centered on dossiers, which leads to the content of the criminal referees’ grounds. At the same time, the system of confidential files of the litigation files makes the public unable to know The real reason for the formation of the verdict makes it difficult for judgments to be justified to “guarantee, explain and examine” functions. However, alternative measures such as “post-judge”, “pre-trial justification”, “post-trial answering”, and justification for making a collegial panel of minority opinions in judgment grounds fail to solve the problem fundamentally. To change this situation, it is not enough to rely solely on the individual’s efforts. Only by reforming the style of criminal judgments, the litigation model centered on case files can be completely transformed into the trial-centered model, the substantive nature of judgments and the application of legal methods and techniques, and the objective function of judgment can be truly realized.