|
| 文章编号：1672-3104(2020)01-0075-12 |
| |
|
争点整理实效化的模式探索与完善 |
| |
孟醒 |
| |
|
（辽宁大学法学院，辽宁沈阳，110036） |
| |
| 摘 要： 我国已建立审前争点整理制度，但该制度过于粗略，导致争点收集功能有限、争点讨论程序不明、争点确定效果缺失，无法发挥切实的争点梳理提炼效果。对比两大法系，可发现存在铺展-精减和挖掘-凝缩两种争点整理实效化的路径。我国现有庭前会议以及证据交换的程序外型，更近似铺展-精减模式，但也仅限于框架上的接近，缺乏实际内核。结合我国司法建设尚待完善、律师代理匮乏以及司法环境不良等因素，我国应选择挖掘-凝缩模式，且德、日相较，应模仿日本的辩论准备程序。如应加强主办法官早期的实质性介入，以法官释明为引导，保障当事人的意见充分阐述，确保在争点整理中的争点收集、争点讨论和争点确认三项功能都能得到发挥。 |
| |
| 关键词： 争点整理实效化；审前动议；释明；心证开示；庭前会议 |
| |
|
| |
Exploration and perfection of effective issue narrowing mode |
| |
MENG Xing |
| |
（School of Law, Liaoning University, Shenyang110036, China） |
| |
| Abstract: China has established the pretrial issue narrowing mechanism, which, however, is too general to provide specific direction for the court to effectively narrow the issues so as to result in limited function of collecting issues, unclear procedures of discussing issues, absent effect of affirming issues, and inability in realizing the effect. Comparing the two law systems, one may find that there are two different modes of issue narrowing. One is the listing-decreasing mode, while the other is the digging-narrowing mode. Considering the situation of undeveloped judicial construction, lawyer system and party disposition on evidence collection, China should take the digging-narrowing mode as the main frame of issue narrowing mechanism. Learning from Japan, the judge responsible for the case should substantively step into issue narrowing early, give the parties full chance to express their case, take full advantage of direction and mind disclosure, and ensure that the pretrial conference can be flexibly used to play different roles at different stages of the issue narrowing procedure. |
| |
Key words: effective issue narrowing; pretrial order; direction; judge’s mind disclosure; pretrial conference |
| |
|
|
