论文部分内容阅读
《法学》1990年第12期刊登了朱墨艳、许务民两同志合写的《建立律师回避制度刍议》一文(以下简称《建》文),作者认为建立律师回避制度理应提到议事日程上来。笔者对此观点不敢苟同,现提供一些不成熟的意见,以供商榷。我国刑事诉讼法、民事诉讼法和行政诉讼法均对回避作了明确的规定,回避制度已经成为我国诉讼法的一项重要制度,并得到理论和实践的肯定。回避是保证案件得到正确处理的重要措施,回避制度的主体是审判人员、检察人员、侦查人员,以及书记员、翻译人员、鉴定人员。为什么只确定上述人员为回避的主体是有一定道理的。审判人员、检察人员和侦查人员是国家法律的化身,是代表法律
Law of the People’s Republic of China No. 12 of 1990 published a document entitled “Establishing a Lawyer’s Avoidance System” written by two comrades Zhu Moyan and Xu Xuelin (hereinafter referred to as “construction”). The author believes that establishing a lawyer’s evasion system should be mentioned on the agenda. I do not agree with this view, I now offer some immature opinions for discussion. China’s Criminal Procedure Law, Civil Procedure Law and Administrative Procedure Law all make clear the avoidance rules. The avoidance system has become an important system in our country’s procedural law and has been affirmed by both theory and practice. Avoidance is an important measure to ensure that the case is properly handled. The main body of the evasion system is the judiciary, prosecutors, investigators, clerks, translators and appraisers. Why only determine the above-mentioned personnel to avoid the subject is a certain truth. Judges, prosecutors and investigators are incarnations of national law and represent the law