论文部分内容阅读
2012年3月16日上午9时,东莞市中级人民法院民二庭开庭审理一宗借款抵押纠纷案件。这次庭审不同以往之处在于,有7个人坐在新设立的“听审席”上。他们手拿着案件资料,边听边记,继而在庭后对法院的庭审工作以及案件处理情况进行集体评议,并从职业技能、司法素养和调解技巧等方面对法官进行评价,这些意见也会交南案件合议庭作为参考。这是东莞中院第一次试行“庭审听审制度”。对试行“庭审听审团制度”持有乐观态度的不仅仅只有作为推动方的东莞中院,它同时受到了法学界、司法实践领域相关人士的认可。不过,在外界普遍赞同之下,仍可以听到一些疑虑的声音。有人直接将“庭审听审团制度”与西方的“陪审团制度”作对比,指出其间的“差距”。作为一项改革尝试,它
At 9:00 a.m. March 16, 2012, the People’s Court of Dongguan Intermediate People’s Court held a hearing on a mortgage loan dispute case. The difference between the court and the past is that there are seven people sitting in the newly established hearing room. They hold case information, listen to memorization, and then conduct collective reviews of the court’s trial and case handling after the court session, as well as judge judges from the aspects of occupational skills, judicial literacy and mediation skills, etc. Pay South Court case as a reference. This is the first trial of Dongguan Intermediate People’s Court “trial hearing system ”. It is not only the Dongguan Intermediate People’s Court that holds an optimistic attitude towards the “trial and hearing system” but is also endorsed by people in the field of law and judicial practice. However, under the general approval of the outside world, some doubts can still be heard. Some people directly compared the “court trial hearing system” with the “jury system” in the west and pointed out the “gap” between them. As a reform attempt, it