论文标题:民事再审程序启动问题研究
A Study on the Start-up of Civil Retrial Proceeding
论文作者 唐吉凯
论文导师 蒋集耀,论文学位 硕士,论文专业 民事诉讼法
论文单位 华东政法学院,点击次数 282,论文页数 73页File Size582k
2002-04-03论文网 http://www.lw23.com/lunwen_1919702/ 并购; 所有者; 经营者; 劳动者; 关系
M&A; Owners; Managers; Laborers; and Relationship
我国现行民事再审制度因其法理上和实践中存在诸多问题,逐渐成为人们关注的焦点。如何构筑现代民事诉讼程序尤其是民事再审程序,是中国法制现代化进程中的重要环节。而民事再审程序的启动问题又最直接反映和体现了整个再审制度设计的基本理念和价值取向,是首先值得研究的问题。作者在借鉴古今中外“再审”制度的基础上,根据市场经济体制对民事诉讼的要求,结合现代民事诉讼法学研究的最新成就,对我国民事再审程序启动问题进行了探讨,以求重构一套科学的、符合民事程序内在规律的我国民事再审程序启动机制。全文分为四个部分:第一部分,对我国民事再审程序启动机制的认识与评价。作者首先介绍了我国民事诉讼法关于再审程序启动主体的规定,指出,由于立法的指导思想受前苏联法学理论影响,加之我国实行计划经济的制度,因而,在民事诉讼领域中,不承认民事经济关系属于私法性质,国家权力对诉讼当事人的活动进行过度干预。表现在程序的启动问题上,法律规定只有法院和检察院才是民事再审程序的启动主体,而本应理所当然地作为启动主体的诉讼当事人却无权独立地启动再审程序。接着,文章对法律关于再审的对象、再审的理由以及再审的期限和次数等规定进行了阐述。在此基础上,结合司法实践,文章从客观和微观的角度对我国再审程序启动机制进行了深入剖析,指出了立法和实践中存在的弊端。第二部分,我国现行再审程序启动机制的形成原因以及对指导思想的认识和评价。作者认为,我国民事再审程序启动机制的形成是受多种因素的影响所致的。中国古代就有对于错误的生效裁判进行救济的制度,司法裁判在古代是缺乏稳定性的,只要当事人对裁判不满,则再审就可以无限制地进行下去。前苏联民事诉讼法理论认为,法院的审判活动就是为了追求案件的实体公正。我国建国以后,不仅全面吸收了苏联的诉讼法学理论,而且全盘复制了其诉讼模式。另外,中国几十年一直实行计划经济体制,我国构建的民事再审制度是与这一经济基础相适应的。最后,作者指出,我国长期坚持的政治思想原则在实践中获得的成功经验,强化了我国民事诉讼再审制度的纠错价值理念,这也是一个重要的形成原因。第三部分,市场经济条件下民事再审程序启动机制的法理基础。作者认为,在市场经济条件下,法院的审判权应当尊重当事人的诉讼权,不应过分干预当事人对自身权益的处分。审判权是为诉讼权服务的并应受到诉讼权的约束。这就要求,在设计民事再审程序启动机制时,法院不应当继续享有启动再审程序的权力,当事人申请再审的权利应进一步加强和完善。同时,市场经济条件下,民事诉讼活动应当以公正作为主要的价值目标,同时兼顾效率价值。以此为指导,再审制度需要保留,但必须加以严格的限制。此外,设计民事再审制度时,应该特别重视生效裁判的稳定性,限制再审案件的对象,严格再审的条件,以维护法院判决的权威性。第四部分,重新构建我国民事再审程序启动机制。根据市场经济对诉讼的要求,按照民事诉讼的内在规律,结合我国具体国情,作者认为,应该对我国现行的民事再审程序启动机制进行重大的修改。在主体方面,应恢复当事人的程序主体地位,当事人对生效裁判不服的,有权申请再审,这种申请在法律上必须产生程序上的结果。同时,禁止法院依职权决定再审。检察院对于普通的民事再审案件不能提出抗诉,但对于涉及到国家重大利益和公共利益的案件,检察院应该有权提出抗诉。在再审的事由方面,有必要对现行法律规定的内容进行修改。作者建议,应以原判决、裁定在程序方面存在严重错误作为主要再审理由,纠正重实体轻程序的倾向。另外,文章对于再审的管辖、再审的范围、再审的次数等问题也作了较为深入的探讨。
Because of the problems existing in legal principle and practice, the present China Civil Retrial Proceeding has become a point at issue. How to construct the modern Civil Proceeding, especially the Civil Retrial Proceeding, will be an important step in the course of the Chinese Legal Modernization. The study of the Start-up of Civil Retrial Proceeding, which directly indicates the fundamental ideas and value orientation of the whole retrial proceeding, takes precedence over any other problems. Based on the study of the “retrial” system home and abroad, the requirements of Market Economy, and the latest achievements of research on Modern Civil Law of Action, this dissertation focuses on the problem of the Start-up of Civil Retrial Proceeding In China, aiming at reconstructing the Start-up System of Civil Retrial Proceeding in China, which accords better with the internal law of Civil Proceeding. This dissertation falls into four parts: In part one, it studies and assesses the start-up system of the present Civil Retrial Proceeding in China. It first introduces the regulations in China of the subject in the start-up of Civil Retrial Proceeding. With the influence of the Ex-Soviet theories of law, and the Planned Economy System, it is often ignored that civil economic relations belong to private laws in nature, and the parties’ actions are over-interfered by the State Power. As far as the start-up of proceeding is concerned, only the courts and procuratorates, according to the regulations, can be the start-up subject of Civil Retrial Proceeding, while the parties are not entitled to start up the retrial proceeding solely. Then the disseration exoatiates on the object, the cause, the term, and the number of times of retrial. Taking the legal practice into consideration it makes a profound analysis into the Start-up system of Civil Retrial Proceeding in China macroscopically and microscopically, and points out the problems in legislation and legal practice. In part two, it studies and assesses the causes and principles of the present Civil Retrial Proceeding in China. According to the author, the formation of the present Civil Retrial Proceeding in China attributes to various factors. In ancient China, there were regulations about legal assistance to the effective wrong decisions.At that time, the legal decisions lacked stability. The retrial would never end until the parties felt satisfied. According to the theories of Civil Law of Action in Ex-Soviet, the trial of courts should lead to justice of entity. After the founding of P.R.China, we not only absorbed the theories of lawsuit in Soviet Union, but also copied its lawsuit model. Besides, China had been carrying on Planned Economy System for decades, and the Civil Retrial System used to be adaptive to the economic base. Finally, the author points out that the successful experience in practising the political principle we insist has strengthened the idea of decision correcting, and is also an important reason for the formation of the start-up system of Civil Retrial Proceeding. Part three discusses the basis of the legal principles of Civil Retrial Proceeding Start-up system under the Market Economy. According to the author, under the market economy, the right of litigation should be respected in the jurisdiction of court, and the decision of the parties’ own rights should not be over-interfered with. The jurisdiction of court serves the right of litigation and should be restricted by the right of litigation. This requires the court, in designing the start-up of civil retrial proceeding, should not be entitled the right of starting up the retrial proceeding, and consequently, the parties’ right of applying for retrial should be reinforced and improved. Meanwhile, under the market economy, the civil actions should aim at justice, taking efficiency into account. In addition, in designing the retrial system, special attention should be paid to the keep the stability of effective decisions, to confine the object of retrial cases, to rest
|
