论文部分内容阅读
作为纠纷产生基础的事实冲突本质上就是意见之争。诉讼模式从职权主义向当事人主义的转向和纠纷解决方式从诉讼向非诉讼方式的转向在是否强调严格程序上相互背离,但是两种转向一致地蕴含了私权自治和寻求当事人自主合意的内在精神。在诉调对接机制中作为一种诉讼分流渠道的调解程序从来不放弃对事实真相的追求,可以说发现事实是诉调对接的逻辑起点。进而言之,在发现调解真实的过程中不管是合意还是强制,不管是查证、举证还是意见交涉都可见以意见取代证据的端倪。在诉调对接程序中,认定事实的材料来源,不再是原始的证据而是一种初级加工过的意见,不再是静态的信息载体而是解释、论证和评价的动态过程。这种意见裁判主义甚至普适于诉讼、调解等纠纷解决程序之中。
The factual conflict that arises as a basis for disputes is essentially a dispute over opinions. The transition of litigation mode from authoritarianism to authoritarianism and the way of dispute resolution From the litigation to the non-litigation mode, the mode of litigation deviates from each other on whether the strict procedure is emphasized or not. However, the two kinds of changes unanimously embody the inherent autonomy power and the inner spirit of seeking the parties’ . The mediation procedure as a kind of litigation diversion mechanism has never given up the pursuit of the truth in the matching mechanism of appeal. It can be said that the fact is the logical starting point of the litigation docking. Furthermore, in the process of discovering whether the conciliation is true, whether it is concurrence or coercion, whether proof, proof or opinion negotiation can all be seen as substituting opinions for evidence. In the appealing transfer procedure, the material source of the ascertained facts is no longer the original evidence but a primary processed opinion. It is no longer a static information carrier but a dynamic process of interpretation, demonstration and evaluation. This kind of opinion referee is even suitable for litigation, mediation and other dispute resolution procedures.