论我国人民陪审员制度的现状与完善
[摘要]陪审制作为公民直接参与司法活动的民主方式，有利于司法公正和司法民主，也有利于司法廉洁和司法监督，而我国人民陪审制尚处于不成熟阶段，在司法实践中已暴露了诸头问题，本文在结合陪审制的产生、意义及中国的社会现状，分析该制度存在的缺陷后，提出完善我国人民陪审员的几点设想。
[关键词]人民陪审员；必要性；意义；现状；完善
实践证明，我国的人民陪审员制度在人民法院的审判工作中发挥出了重要的制度，形成了人民司法的优良传统。它是全面推进司法改革、促进司法民主的重要举措，已经得到社会各界的普遍认同。但一直以来，无论是司法实务界还是法学理论界，对于我国人民陪审员制度的存废却进行着激烈的争执。虽然2004年８月28日第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十一次会议通过了《关于完善人民陪审员制度的决定》，欲起到定纷止争的作用，但此类争执仍未消弭。故当下对我国人民陪审员制度的探讨仍具有很强的现实及理论意义。
一、人民陪审员制度的产生及在我国的确立
(一)、简述国外陪审制度的发展历程
陪审制度作为一项诉讼制度在古代审判制度的基础上发展起来，源于公元前594年的古代希腊和罗马。这得益于雅典著名的政治家梭伦的改革①，从其实施过程可以看出陪审团人数的多少反映了所审案件重要性的大小。
现代的陪审制度肇始于欧洲中世纪②。英美法系最早采取陪审方式的是英国，如英国历史上著名的12人陪审团。在殖民地时期，英国殖民者就将陪审制度带到了美国，由此而知，美国的陪审制度完全是在借鉴英国的传统的基础上形成并发展的。
大陆法系最早采取陪审方式的是法国“加洛林”王朝③，虽然王权的一度扩张导致陪审制度逐渐消失。但法国大革命时期，为了反封建和推进民主的需要，法国引入了英美法模式的陪审制，并在司法制度的设计上突出公民权和对司法权力的制约，使其成为体现司法民主和主权在民宪政思想的一项重要制度。而由于拿破仑对德国的征服，陪审制度也被引进了德国。
(二)、简述我国陪审制度的发展历程
中国的陪审制度虽启萌于清朝④。但旧中国内忧外患的残酷现状导致中国法制建设举步维艰，公民权与司法权无法得到有力保障，陪审制也成了一纸空文。
新中国成立之初，在中国共产党的领导下，以抗战时期根据地陪审制度建设经验为基础，如著名的“马锡武审判方式”就采用的陪审制度，1949年《共同纲领》和1951年《人民法院暂行组织条例》规定了陪审制度。1954年宪法将其确认为一项宪法制度，其第75条明确规定:“人民法院审判案件依照法律实行人民陪审员制度。”
但大跃进特别是文化大革命期间，军管人员代替法官办案，司法制度受到冲击和破坏，陪审制度也严重异化。1978年，中国开始恢复和重建司法制度，陪审制度得以重建。同年通过的《宪法》第41条规定:“人民法院审判案件，依照法律规定实行群众代表陪审的制度。”随后，1979年新颁布的《人民法院组织法》和中国第一部《刑事诉讼法》也做了规定。至此，陪审制度作为一项审判制度被确定下来，并具有强制性。由于人民民主意识的加强和我国政治体制改革的推进，使得人民陪审制度的价值倍受观注。
2004年８月28日，第十届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十一次会议通过了《关于完善人民陪审员制度的决定》，这是社会各界不断努力探索的结果，为我国人民陪审制度的发展提供了新的契机。
二、人民陪审制度在中国是否应该保留及存在的意义。
（一）陪审制度是否应该保留
一直以来，无论是司法实务界还是法学理论界，对于我国人民陪审员制度的存废进行着激烈的争执。综合反对保留陪审制度的理由，主要有以下三点：
1、陪审制度不符合中国国情。由于中国几千年的封建专制统治，造成独立人格意识和民主意识淡薄，民众易屈服于权威。且中国是一个人情社会，民众历来是“重人情、轻法治”，审判易受人情的影响；
2、陪审人员难满足审判要求。民间挑选出的人民陪审员，虽然具有一定的法律意识和司法经验，但其审理案件的能力仍不具备，特别是案情复杂案件；
3、陪审费用易造成资源浪费⑤。人民陪审员参审支出的大量费用如误工费、食宿费、交通费等，这些费用大都是由法院从自身办公经费中支出。针对中国目前各级法院现状，承担此费用仍有很大压力。
针对上述三点反对意见，笔者一一评析，认为人民陪审制度需保留。
1、以发展的眼光看待中国的现状。我国经历漫长的封建社会不假，但并不能以此枉下我国人民屈服权力、反对参与司法的结论。从人民陪审制度在中国的发展历程就可看出，中国民众正从以往对权力的顶礼膜拜，一步步的以主人翁的姿态积极争取法律应该赋予自己的权利。我国的民主进程有目共瞩，公民的法律意识和法律知识都有很大的提高，以封建历程之久来否认陪审制度的存在观点难以立足；
2、以全面的视野理解陪审员的意义。陪审员就其法律专业素养及审判经验来讲，的确不如职业法官，容易受感情的影响和伪证的迷惑，有时对复杂的案件较难做出准确的判断和了解。但从判断事务上讲，陪审员能从社会伦理和社会一般价值标准出发看待问题，具有能正确反映民意的优点。选取最合理之理由，在案件审判做到合法的同时最大程度的合理化，这也符合当代中国审判的要求。
3、以理性的价值观领悟司法效率的本质。本人认为陪审制度是涉及司法公正的问题，司法效率与司法公正并不属于一个层面，当发生抵触时，应当优级先考虑司法公正的问题。
（二）人民陪审制度存在的意义
人民陪审制度的存在有其深刻的意义。其价值主要体现在它的司法民主价值和司法工具价值。
1、司法民主价值。人民陪审员制度的司法民主价值是指陪审制度在维护公众的民主权利方面的价值，它是陪审制度在形成过程中所追求的初始价值，或者说是陪审制度的内在价值，它体现在人民陪审员参与法庭审理的过程之中。
（1）、人民陪审员制度体现社会主义民主。民主是陪审制存在的基础和实现的方式，是陪审制的核心，民主贯穿于陪审制始终。
一方面，人民陪审制符合我国政治体制的要求。我国是人民民主专政的社会主义国家，人民陪审员制度是我国民主制度的重要组成部分，是人民司法工作依靠群众的重要形式，是实现社会主义司法民主的重要方式和途径。人民通过陪审方式参与司法活动，直接感受到参与了国家审判权的行使，是真正行使民主权利的一种形式，体现了人民群众是国家的主人。
另一方面，人民陪审制加快我国民主建设的进程。人民群众管理国家、建设国家的积极性，司法民主被视为实行陪审制度的正当化理由，陪审制度是司法民主的象征和宣示。人民陪审员制度已成为人民司法工作依靠群众的重要形式，人民陪审制度体现了人民群众参与司法的民主化进程，也调动了人民群众参与司法的积极性和能动性，对加强我国的民主与法治建设起到了一定的积极作用。
（2）、人民陪审员制度监督司法权力行使。广大人民群众通过人民陪审员制度直接参与司法过程中，可以对司法权行使进行直接的、面对面的监督。
一方面，人民陪审员监督震慑于法官的一言一行。如果一名法官与陪审员共同审判，则该法官在各种诱惑面前一般要三思而后行。一位法官对陪审员陪审这样表述:“感到不仅双方当事人的眼睛在注视着我，旁听群众的眼睛在注视着我，而且陪审员的眼睛也在注视着我，这是一种无声的监督。”
另一方面，人民陪审员监督贯穿于案件的审理过程。人民陪审员在具体的个案中参加案件的调查取证的全过程，相对于其他公民而言，更容易发现问题。由于人民陪审员与法院的利害关系不大，他们也更容易在司法审判中揭露自己在案件中发现的问题，从而更容易防止法官在审判过程中搞“暗箱操作”。
（3）、人民陪审员制度促进法制教育发展。审判法庭可以说是一所内容丰富范围极广的普法教育课堂。陪审员制度对于增进公民的法律知识具有很好的促进作用。
一方面是人民法院对人民陪审员的教育与宣传。人民以陪审员的资格参加审判，也能受到国家的管理教育，受到严格的遵守法律锻炼。人民陪审员通过直接参与审判活动，亲身经历有关诉讼程序、证据采纳规则、审理裁判过程以及法律适用等，相当于自己接受了一堂生动的法制教育课，不仅可以学到许多法律知识，而且从亲身经历的案例中获得启发和教训。
一方面是人民陪审员对人民大众的传播与辐射。由于人民陪审员来自于社会大众，他们还把自己参加审判所受到的教育锻炼输于广大人民，回到大众中去，他们可以通过向其他群众讲述自己陪审的经历，以及他们从中获取的法律知识传播给更广泛的人们，从而对全社会起到普法宣传的教育功能。一位伟大的历史学家曾把它说成是“有利于国家和平发展和进步的一种最强大的力量”。
2、司法工具价值。人民陪审员制度的司法工具价值是指陪审制度的外在价值，它的实现体现在纠纷的化解和裁判结果的正当功能上，集中体现在陪审员参加的审判所能够产生的理想结果上。这一价值实际上是现代陪审制度在形成过程中逐步显现出来的。
（1）人民陪审员制度有利于促进司法公正。一般来说法律只是原则性的、有限的条文，且于现实生活具有滞后性。面对丰富的社会生活，其规定难免有所漏洞。因此法官在审判过程中，常常需要借鉴社会生活经验，借鉴社会公认的公平、正义原则。而法官由于其职业特点和生活圈层的限制，对社会公众公认的公平、公正原则和社会公众的良心，对社会生活方方面面的经验难以全面了解和体验。人民陪审员大多来自基层，熟悉社会，了解民情民意，他们的大众性思维，可以与职业法官的职业思维形成有效互补，矫正法官的职业偏见，督促法官养成公正的职业道德，进而促进司法公正。
（2）人民陪审员制度有利于广纳公众智慧。⑥陪审员的专业知识优势可以弥补职业法官知识结构单一的缺陷，进而保障司法公正。目前我国很多法官在案件的法律适用上研究的比较深入，能利用一些法理来分析解决现实中的法律问题。但对于法律以外其他一些专业性很强的领域如金融、财会、房地产、股权等研究的不够专业、深入，而一旦出现类似领域的纠纷案件，知识的匮乏成为案件审理中的一种欠缺。而陪审制度却完全可以克服这种缺陷，它通过充分利用社会上丰富的人才资源，吸收各行各业的专家参与审理此类案件，形成较为科学完善的文化、智力和专业结构，陪审员和法官发挥知识互补的实力，大大提高了法官专业化审判水平，弥补了法官的专业知识缺陷，从而有效避免做出不公正的裁判。
三、我国人民陪审员制度的现状
我国是人民民主专政的社会主义国家，一切权利属于人民，人民陪审制是人民当家作主，参与国家管理活动的一种重要形式，具有不可缺少性，但它在我国审判实践中反映出来的问题是不容忽视的。
（一）人民陪审员代表的片面性
1、人民陪审员产生方式的制约性。从人民陪审员的产生来看，一种是选民选举或有关单位推荐产生，另一种是法院（长期或临时）聘任。法律法规并未对两种选任方式做具体规定，过于笼统。在实践中，单位推荐和法院长期聘任的方式较为常见，法官总是希望由那些曾与自己意见相合，甚至习惯于听从自己的陪审员合作，因此，陪审员与法官组成合议庭相对稳定，这样就使陪审员参加审判工作的比率相差较大。这也造成了实际担任陪审员的只是公民中的极少数人，而不是普遍的。
2、人民陪审员任命期限的模糊性。从人民陪审员的任期来看，陪审员任期一般为五年，并可连任，这就使得陪审员的资格相对稳定。并不会使极少数人才有可能成为陪审员的情况有根本的变化。许多已经担任过陪审员的人在任期届满后仍可能保留在新的陪审员名单中。因此，陪审员由少数人担任的情况是较普遍的现象，这样就使陪审员所代表的范围大大缩小。与陪审制度的本质—司法民主相悖。
（二）人民陪审员作用发挥的约束性
1、人民陪审员素质判断过于单一。从陪审员的素质来说，人民陪审员被要求具备大专以上的文化程度，但仅仅对学历的要求仍难以满足陪审员的现实需要，也无法判断一个人分析问题的逻辑能力，特别是遇到案情比较复杂的案件，由于受其业务实力与法制素质的限制，陪审员很难把握事实，正确地分析证据，从而导致人民陪审员制度流于形式，陷于被动。
2、人民陪审员考核机制不够健全。人民陪审员在审判中与法官享有同等的权利，同样应该也应与审判员有同等的义务，其在审理案件时违法违纪也应按审判员违法违纪责任追究办法处理。但就目前对陪审员的管理上看，尤其在错案追究责任上，主审法官是第一责任人，现行的法律对陪审员过错没有具体追究责任的措施，这样，不仅弱化了陪审员陪审义务，也助长了陪审员合而不议的风气。
（三）人民陪审员管理上缺乏可操作性
1、人民陪审员管理机构不够专业。审判工作需要陪审员到法院履行职务，则在法院内设臵专门机构对陪审员进行管理，保证人民陪审员制度的落实是非常有必要的。但在现实中，人民法院并没有设臵相应的专门机构，或者有专门机构也形同虚设。
2、人民陪审员身份保障不够健全。在身份保障方面，人民陪审员的地位和待遇都比较低。虽然《决定》第十九条规定人民陪审员因参加审判活动应当享受的补助，人民法院和司法行政机关为实施陪审制度所必需的开支，列入人民法院和司法律行政机关业务经费，由同级财政予以保障，但在实际执行过程中，由于地方财政紧张，人民陪审员经费难以足额保障，致使人民陪审员对其价值产生怀疑。
3、人民陪审员培训制度不够科学。在培训方面，大多数法院对陪审员进行了任前培训以及每年一次的为期两三天集中业务培训，但这种培训取得的效果为短期的，一名人民陪审员需要经过长期的学习和培训，各方面素质才能得到提高，才能更好地发挥作用。
四、完善我国陪审制度的对策和建议
（一）从人民陪审员的选任要求和程序上，提高人民陪审员的代表性
1、人民陪审员素质判断方式的多元化。鉴于陪审制度的本质，在人民陪审员的选任上应强调其广泛性、代表性。在陪审员的资格上，陪审员的文化程度是一个值得注意的问题，这里所说的文化程度并不是专指法律方面的知识，还包括一定的常训和逻辑思维能力。像如今的公务员招考，分笔试与面试。笔试内容全面，涉及范围广，以更好的判断考生的知识面，面试题目新颖，切合社会现状，以更好的判断考生的应变与表述能力。
2、人民陪审员程序选任方式的合理化。为确保陪审员的素质，陪审员应选举产生，陪审员的选举应当独立进行，各级人大常委会成立人民陪审员任选委员会，为避免不必要的浪费，陪审员的选举可与基层人民代表的同步进行，这样做可以不断更新陪审员，使陪审员的代表范围更为宽广。根据案件的数量，确定当先陪审员在总人口中所占的比例，一般情况下不宜比例太小，从而影响案件的审理。陪审员先出后，陪审员名单由选举委员会掌握，法院审判案件前，可委托选举委员会随机抽取一定名额的陪审员参加审判，选出的名额应多于审判时之名额，以备控辩双方提出回避或庭审期间陪审员生病等事实出现时使用，这样做，可以杜绝出于各种考虑指定陪审员进行审判。
（二）从人民陪审员的任期与追责上，提高人民陪审员的责任意识
1、任期上主张不加期限。人民陪审员是否需要规定任期这个问题上，本人认为不需要规定陪审员的任期，而是符合规定的并通过法定途径产生的陪审员一旦确定就具有陪审员的资格，第二年再由县（区）级人大常委会对以前确定的陪审进行资格复审，如有不符合条件的撤销其陪审员资格。一方面节约陪审员新旧更替带来的资源浪费，如新进人员的培训费等，一方面一年一次的资格复审，无形中也加强了人民陪审员的自律。
2、追责上主张权责分明。从《决定》可以看出，人民陪审员与法官在审判中享有同等的权利，但法官是案件的第一责任人，人民陪审员在错案追究上不承担责任，这是导致陪审员审判中责任意识不强的一个重要原因。陪审员在享有权利的同时，应同样履行与审判员同等的义务，准时到庭，及时做好庭前准备工作，积极参与庭审活动，陪审员应当自始至终参加一个案件的审理活动，如果陪审员无正当理由不能按时执行职务或者拒绝履行职务的人民法院可以对其予以罚款或其他惩罚措施。
在陪审员的职权上，⑧美国的陪审员职权是对被告是否有罪作出裁决，而适用法律则交给法官，由法官判处其应适用的刑罚。我国可以借鉴这种权限划分，明确规定人民陪审员只做那些他们自己能够做到的。并且是做得好的事，即只认定案件事实问题。如法庭陈述的真假，或者当庭举出的合部控诉和辩护证据能否令人信服的得出被告人有罪或无罪，这是凭借普通大众的日常生活经验就可得出的正确结论的问题。
（三）从人民陪审员的管理上，健全人民陪审员的管理机制
1、加强对人民陪审员的培训管理。设立对人民陪审员的专管机构，加强人民陪审员的培训，提高人民陪审员的素质，也是为了更好的服务于审判。
一是对陪审员定期培训，定期组织陪审员学习法律知识和观摩法院的庭审活动，让陪审员学习掌握新颁布的法律法规，从而不断提高陪审员的素质，提高其履行职责的能力。石门县人民法院高度重视人民陪审员在庭审中的作用，不仅对人民陪审员予以定期培训，同时对于影响较大的典型性案件组织全体人民陪审员旁听，反响甚佳。
二是吸收陪审员作为法官业余学校学员，邀请陪审员参加对某些新型案例的研讨等。
三是注重庭前准备，可以在开庭前将起诉书、答辩状送人民陪审员一份，让其了解案件的基本情况或争议焦点，引导陪审员熟悉相关法律条文，更好地发挥其在审判过程中的作用。同时还要提高具有专业知识的陪审员的比例，如医疗卫生人员、工程技术人员等，这样可以使审理一些比较专业的案件，如医疗案件、工程争议案件时，陪审员的专业知识和审判人员的法律知识形成一个优势互补，从而提高案件的审判质量。
2、健全人民陪审员考核约束机制。
一是健全考核约束机制。可以考虑同人大协商制定专门制度考核约束人民陪审员的工作，对无故推脱不参加庭审的人民陪审员采取相应的措施予以约束。人大每年对人民陪审员工作进行综合测评，将考核结果备案，作为下次推荐人民陪审员候先人时的参考。
二是实施单独序列考核管理。法院可以成立人民陪审员办公室，由政治处来负责对陪审员的选任、资格审核、校训，受理当事人要求人民陪审员参审的申请、通知到法院履行职务、支付报酬。对人民陪审员进行考核、惩戒等管理工作。对表现突出的，应采取适当方式予以表彰，这样既便于考核和管理，又有利于确保人民陪审员依法履行职责。
3、落实人民陪审员的保障条件。上级法院应会同司法行政部门，报请各级人大，明确陪审员名额及陪审员经费标准，协调各级政府财政部门，追加财政预算，今后每年列入正常财政预算，保障陪审员培训和履取经费⑦。法院明确规定根据陪审的次数或时间长短给予相应的报酬，消除陪审员在物质保障上的后顾之忧。从法律上明确对陪审员人身案例的保障，对打击、报复陪审员的诉讼参与人或其他人员要给予严惩，消除陪审员陪审时的后顾之忧。
①陈盛清主编：《外国法制史》，北京大学出版社1982年版，第39页。
②③④王利明：《我国陪审制度研究》，浙江社会科学2000年第1期，第55页。
⑤王敏远《中国陪审制度及完善》，载于《法学研究》1999年第4期。
⑥刘家兴：《新中国民事程序理论与适用》第117页。 ⑦程雷：《人民陪审制度的现状及思考》，载《人民司法》1997年第5期。
⑧龙宗智：上帝怎样审判[M].北京.法律出版社2006.
On the Status Quo and Perfection of People’s Juror System
[Abstract] Jury system, as a democratic way for citizens to directly participate in judicial activities, is conducive to judicial fairne and judicial democracy as well as judicial honesty and judicial supervision.However, people\'s juror system in our country is still at an immature stage and has been exposed in judicial practice.After discuing the birth and the significance of the jury system and the current social conditions in China, this article analyzes the shortcomings of the system, and proposes some suggestions on how to improve the people\'s jury in our country.[Key words] people\'s juror; neceity; meaning; current situation; perfection Practice has proved that the people\'s juror system in our country has played an important role in the trial of people\'s courts and has formed a fine tradition of people\'s justice.It is an important measure to promote judicial reform in an all-round way and promote judicial democracy.It has been widely recognized by all walks of life.However, no matter from the field of judicial practice or legal theory, there has been a fierce dispute over the existence and abolition of the people\'s jury system in our country.Although the 11th meeting of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People\'s Congre on August 28, 2004 adopted the \"Decision on Perfecting the System of People\'s Jurors,\" which is intended to play a role in determining the extent of the dispute, such disputes have not yet been settled Eliminate.Therefore, the discuion on the people\'s jury system in our country still has very strong realistic and theoretical significance. First, the people\'s jury system and the establishment of our country (A), briefly describe the development of jury system in foreign countries As a litigation system, the jury system developed on the basis of the ancient judicial system originated from ancient Greece and Rome in 594 BC.This is due to the reform of Solon, a famous Athens politician.From its implementation, it can be seen that the number of juries reflects the importance of the case under trial. The modern jury system started in medieval Europe ②.Anglo-American legal system is the earliest jury way the United Kingdom, such as the famous 12-person jury in the history of Britain.During the colonial period, British colonialists brought the jury system to the United States.From this we can see that the jury system in the United States was formed and developed solely on the basis of British tradition.The earliest jury trial in the civil law system was the French \"Carolingian\" dynasty3, although the jury system gradually disappeared once the expansion of the monarchy.However, during the French Revolution, in order to counter feudalism and promote democracy, France introduced the jury system of the Anglo-American legal model and highlighted the citizenship and restriction of judicial power in the design of the judicial system, making it the embodiment of judicial democracy and sovereignty over the people An Important System of Constitutional Thought.Due to Napoleon\'s conquest of Germany, jury system was also introduced into Germany. (B), briefly describes the development of jury system in our country Although China\'s jury system started in the Qing Dynasty ④.However, the brutal current situation in the old China caused the difficult legal construction in China, civic rights and judicial power can not be effectively protected, and jury system has become a dead letter.At the beginning of the founding of New China, under the leadership of the Communist Party of China and based on the experience of building a jury system in the base area during the War of Resistance Against Japan, such as the jury system adopted by the famous \"Ma Xiwu Trial Method,\" the \"Common Program\" of 1949 and the \"People\'s Court of 1951 Interim Organization Ordinance \"provides for the jury system.The 1954 Constitution recognized it as a constitutional system and Article 75 of the Constitution clearly stipulates: \"People\'s courts shall try their case in accordance with the law in the trial of the people\'s court case.\" However, during the Great Leap Forward, especially during the Cultural Revolution, military personnel took the place of judges for handling cases, the judicial system was attacked and destroyed, and the jury system also suffered serious alienation.In 1978, China began to restore and rebuild the judicial system, and the jury system was rebuilt.Article 41 of the Constitution, paed in the same year, stipulates: \"The people\'s court shall try the case in accordance with the law and carry out the system of ma representation of the jury.\" Subsequently, the newly promulgated \"Organization Law of the People\'s Court\" in 1979 and China\'s first \"Criminal Procedure Law \"Also made provisions.At this point, jury system as a trial system has been established, and mandatory.Due to the strengthening of the people\'s democratic awarene and the advance of the political system reform in our country, the value of the people\'s jury system has been greatly watched. On August 28, 2004, the 11th meeting of the Standing Committee of the Tenth National People\'s Congre paed the Decision on Perfecting the System of People\'s Aeors, which is the result of continuous efforts by all walks of life in the exploration and development of the system of people\'s jury in our country Development provides a new opportunity.Second, whether the people\'s jury system should be retained in China and its existence. (A) whether the jury system should be retained All along, both judicial practice circles and jurisprudence circles have fierce arguments over the existence and abolition of the people\'s jury system in our country.The reasons for comprehensively opposing the retention of the jury system are as follows: 1, jury system does not meet China\'s national conditions.Due to China\'s several thousand years of feudal autocratic rule, resulting in an independent personality and a weak sense of democracy, the people easily succumbed to authority.And China is a humane society.The people have always been \"paying attention to the human race and ignoring the rule of law.\" The trial is susceptible to the influence of human beings. 2, jury staff difficult to meet the trial requirements.Although the people\'s jurors selected by the people have certain legal awarene and judicial experience, they still do not have the ability to handle cases, especially the complicated cases; 3, jury fees easily lead to waste of resources ⑤.People\'s jurors participating in a large expenditure of expenses such as the lo of working time, boarding fees, transportation expenses, etc., most of these costs are spent by the court from their own office expenses.In response to the current status of courts in China at various levels, there is still a lot of preure to bear this cost. In response to the above three points of objection, the author one by one comment, that the people\'s jury system needs to be retained. 1, look at the status of China from a development perspective.Our country experienced a long feudal society is not fake, but not in vain under the people of our country to submit to the power, the opposition to participate in the conclusion of the judiciary.From the development proce of the people\'s jury system in China, we can see that the Chinese people are paying their own rights to fight for power proactively in a step-by-step approach based on their own masters\' attitude.The democratic proce in our country has a clear view of both the public interest and the law.Citizens have great improvement in their legal and legal knowledge.It is hard to gain a foothold to deny the existence of the jury system by the long history of feudalism. 2, a comprehensive vision to understand the meaning of jury.Jurors, in terms of their profeional legal literacy and trial experience, are indeed not as good as profeional judges, susceptible to feelings and perplexity of perjury, and sometimes difficult to make accurate judgments and understandings in complex cases.Judging matters, however, the jurors can perceive iues from the perspective of social ethics and social common values and have the advantage of correctly reflecting public opinion.It is also in line with the requirements of contemporary China\'s trial that the most reasonable reason should be chosen to maximize its legitimacy in the trial of the case. 3, with rational values to understand the eence of judicial efficiency.I think the jury system is a matter involving the fairne of the judiciary.Judicial efficiency and judicial fairne do not belong to one level.When there is a conflict, we should first consider the iue of judicial fairne.(2) the significance of the people\'s jury system The existence of people\'s jury system has its profound significance.Its value is mainly reflected in its judicial democratic value and judicial tool value. 1, the value of judicial democracy.The judicial and democratic value of the system of people\'s jurors refers to the value of the jury system in safeguarding the democratic rights of the public.It is the initial value of jury system in the proce of its formation, or is the intrinsic value of jury system.It is reflected in the people\'s jury system Members participate in court proceedings.The company is located in: (1) People\'s jury system reflects socialist democracy.Democracy is the basis of jury system and the way to realize it.It is the core of jury system.Democracy runs through jury system.On the one hand, people\'s jury system is in line with the requirements of our political system.Our country is a socialist country under the people\'s democratic dictatorship.The system of people\'s aeors is an important part of our democratic system.It is an important form by which the people\'s judicial work relies on the maes and an important way and means to realize socialist judiciary democracy.People participate in judicial activities through jury methods and feel directly involved in the exercise of the nation\'s judicial power.They are a form of truly exercising democratic rights and reflect that the people and the maes are the masters of the country. On the other hand, the people\'s jury system will speed up the proce of democratic construction in our country.The people\'s enthusiasm in administering the country and building the nation and judiciary democracy are regarded as justification for the jury system.Jury system is a symbol and declaration of judicial democracy.The system of people\'s jurors has become an important form by which people\'s judicial work relies on the maes.The system of people\'s jury reflects the people\'s participation in the proce of democratization of the judiciary.It also mobilizes the enthusiasm and initiative of the people in judiciary participation and plays an important role in strengthening the building of democracy and the rule of law in our country To a certain positive effect. (2) People\'s aeor system supervises the exercise of judicial power.The majority of the people directly participate in the judicial proce through the system of people\'s jurors and can exercise direct and face-to-face supervision over the exercise of judicial power. On the one hand, the people\'s aeors monitor and deter the judge\'s words and deeds.If a judge and jury co-judge, then the judge in the face of all kinds of temptation to think twice before you go.One judge said to the jury jury: \"I felt not only the eyes of both parties watching me, the eyes of the maes watching me, but also the jury\'s eyes watching me, which is a silent supervision.\" On the other hand, people\'s jury supervision runs through the case.People\'s aeors in the specific case to participate in the case of investigation and evidence collection proce, compared to other citizens, the more likely to find the problem.As people\'s jurors have little stake in the court, they are also more likely to expose their own problems found in the case in judicial trials, making it easier to prevent judges from engaging in \"black hat\" operations during the trial. (3) People\'s jury system to promote the development of legal education.The trial court can be said to be a very rich and extensive popularization education claroom.Jury system for promoting the legal knowledge of citizens has a very good role in promoting. On the one hand, it is the education and propaganda of people\'s court on people\'s aeors by people\'s courts.People participate in trials with jury qualification, but also receive state management and education and are subject to strict compliance with the law.Through direct participation in trial activities, people\'s jurors first hand to experience the relevant procedures, the rules for the adoption of evidence, the trial of the referee proce and the application of law, which is equivalent to accepting a vivid legal education cla, not only can learn a lot of legal knowledge, Experience and leons learned from the experience of the case. On the one hand, it is the spread and radiation of people\'s jurors to the public.Since the people\'s jurors come from the general public, they also lose their education and training they have participated in the trials to the maes and return to the public.They can tell other people about their jury experience and the legal knowledge they have gained from them Dieminate it to a wider range of people and thereby educate society as a whole.A great historian once described it as \"one of the most powerful forces conducive to the peaceful development and progre of the country.\" 2, the value of judicial tools.The value of judicial tools in the system of people\'s jurors refers to the external value of the jury system.Its realization is reflected in the proper function of the diolution of the dispute and the result of the refereeing, and is embodied in the ideal result that the jury members can participate in.This value is actually the gradual emergence of the modern jury system in its formation. (1) People\'s jury system is conducive to promoting judicial justice.In general, law is only a principled and limited provision and lags behind in real life.Faced with rich social life, its provisions will inevitably be loopholes.Therefore, during the trial, the judge often needs to learn from the experience of social life and draw leons from the socially accepted principle of fairne and justice.Judges, because of their profeional characteristics and the limits of the living circle, recognize the fairne and fairne of the general public as well as the conscience of the public, and find it hard to fully understand and experience all aspects of social life.Most of the people\'s jurors come from graroots level, are familiar with society, understand the conditions of public opinion and public opinion, and their popular thinking can complement the occupational judge\'s profeional thinking effectively, rectify the judge\'s profeional prejudice, urge judges to develop fair profeional ethics and promote judicial fairne . (2) People\'s jury system is conducive to 广纳 public wisdom.⑥
The profeional expertise of jurors can make up for the single defect of the profeional judge\'s knowledge structure and thus guarantee the judicial fairne.At present, many judges in our country have studied more deeply on the application of law in cases and can use some jurisprudence to analyze and solve the legal problems in reality.However, some fields of specialization other than law are le specialized and in-depth than those specialized in finance, accounting, real estate and stock rights.In the event of disputes in similar fields, the lack of knowledge has become a deficiency in the handling of cases.The jury system can completely overcome this defect.It takes full advantage of the abundant human resources in society and recruits experts from all walks of life to participate in the trial of such cases to form a more scientific and complete cultural, intellectual and profeional structure.Jurors and judges Give play to the strength of complementing each other\'s knowledge, greatly improve the level of judges \'profeional judgment, make up for the defects of the judges\' profeional knowledge and effectively avoid making unfair judgments. Third, the status quo of the people\'s jury system in our country China is a socialist country under the people\'s democratic dictatorship and all its rights belong to the people.People\'s jury system is an important form of the people\'s masters and their participation in state management activities.It is indispensable, but it reflects the problems in our country\'s trial practice Can not be ignored. (I) One-sidedne of the representative of the people\'s aeors 1, the constraints of the way people\'s jurors produce.Judging from the emergence of people\'s aeors, one is the election of voters or the recommendation of relevant units, and the other is the appointment of courts (long-term or interim).Laws and regulations do not make specific provisions on the two options, too general.In practice, the unit recommendation and long-term appointment of the court are more common, and the judge always wants to cooperate with those jurors who have used their own opinions and even accustomed themselves to hearing from oneself.Therefore, jurors and judges form a relatively stable court, so that The rate of participation of jurors in trials varies widely.This has also resulted in the fact that only a handful of citizens are jurors, not universal. 2, the jury of the ambiguity of the term of appointment.Judging from the term of office of the people\'s aeors, jurors generally hold a term of office of five years and be eligible for reelection, thus making jurors relatively more qualified.Does not fundamentally change the situation in which very few people are likely to be jurors.Many who have served as jurors may still remain on the new jury list after the term expires.Therefore, it is more common for jurors to be members of minorities, thus greatly reducing the scope of jurors.And the nature of jury system - the opposite of judicial democracy. (B) the role of people\'s jury play binding 1, the people\'s jury quality judgment is too single.In terms of the quality of jurors, people\'s jurors are required to have a college education or above.However, the requirements of academic qualifications alone can not satisfy the actual needs of jurors nor can they judge the logic ability of a person to analyze problems, especially when they encounter Due to its limited busine conditions and the quality of the legal system, jury members find it difficult to grasp the facts and correctly analyze the evidence.As a result, the people\'s jury system is in a paive state. 2, the aement mechanism of the people\'s jury is not sound enough.People\'s jurors shall enjoy the same rights as judges during the trial.Equally, the people\'s aeors should also have the same obligations as the judges.When they try the case, the law and discipline should also be handled according to the accountability of the lawbreakers and violators.However, judging from the current management of jurors, in particular, the trial judge is the first responsible person for the investigation of the wrong case, and the current law imposes no liability on jury members
