摘要
"两非"原则是对法官追责的基本要求,即非因法定事由,非经法定程序,法官依法履职不受追究。司法责任制改革之初创设的法官惩戒委员会制度是落实法官追责"两非"原则的重要支撑,为法官惩戒提供了专业评鉴和程序规制,已被新修订的《法官法》所吸纳;但实践中一直进展不大,几被搁置,亟待激活。要在整体把握制度演进的基础上,综合理解新修订《法官法》中"违反审判职责"的含义,并与《关于完善人民法院司法责任制的若干意见》等司法改革文件精神相协调。法官惩戒委员会的审查内容不仅包括法官是否构成故意违反职责、存在重大过失、存在一般过失或没有违反职责,而且还应包括重大过失与案件裁判错误之间的关联性,以及因此造成的后果是否严重等。法官惩戒委员会有从专业角度提出审查意见的权力,但不应享有无责、免责或给予惩戒处分的建议权。法官惩戒委员会的组成应坚持专业性原则;在审议程序设置方面,应彰显司法化方式;在与监察机制衔接方面,应尊重法官惩戒委员会的专业审查意见,建立异议和复议制度。在未来的制度发展中,可将职业伦理责任纳入法官惩戒委员会"视情审议"的事项。
The basic requirement for the accountability of judges is that judges shall be held accountable.for performing their duties in accordance with the law only for statutory reasons or through statutory procedures.The judge disciplinary committee system established at the beginning of the judicial accountability reform is an importanl support for the implementation of the requirement for the.accountability of judges,providing professional evaluation and procedural regulation for the punishment of judges.It has been adopted by the newly revised Judges Law;However,little progress has been made in practice,and there is an urgent need for the system to be activated.Based on the overall understanding of the evolution of the system,it is necessary to comprehensively unders tand the meaning of"violating judicial duties"in the newly revised Judges Law in accordance with judicial reform documents such as Several Opinions on Improving the Judicial Accountability System of the People’s Courts.The judge disciplinary committee needs to investigate not only whether there is a deliberate breach of duty,gross negligence,general negligence,or non-violation of duties,but also the correlation between gross negligence and wrong judgment,and whether there are serious consequences.Ihe judge disciplinary committee has the authority to give professional review reports,but it should not have the authority to suggest irresponsibility,exemption,or disciplinary sanctions.The judge disciplinary committee should be composed of professionals;in terms of deliberation procedures,the judicial.approach should be highlighted;in connection with the supervision mechanism,the expert review report of the judge disciplinary committee should be respected,and a system of objection and reconsideration should be established.In the future development of the system,the professional ethic responsibility can be included in the"deliberation"of the judge disciplinary committee.
作者
夏锦文
徐英荣
Xia Jinwen;Xu Yingrong
出处
《江苏社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第6期119-128,243,共11页
Jiangsu Social Sciences
基金
中宣部“文化名家”暨“四个一批”人才专项课题“构筑国家治理体系和治理能力现代化的法治支撑研究”及江苏高校区域法治发展协同创新中心、中国法治现代化研究院学术研究成果
