比较法视野下庭审公开的制度功能

庭审公开制度关涉到一个国家司法的价值取向与功能定位,不能简单地移植他国做法,须在功能比较的基础上审慎定夺。法国、俄罗斯、美国的庭审公开,分别代表了司法保守主义下的“不公开”、以公开强化监督和法律实用主义下的个案探索三种制度实践。它们根植于三个国家不同的政治社会环境与法律传统,体现了司法的不同功能与角色。在“政法传统”下,我国的司法公开当以提升司法公信力为终极目标。因此,我们应该适当借鉴域外庭审公开的制度设计,重视本国个案,根据不同制度的实施效果,在一个恰当的功能体系内,平衡各种公开制度的角色分际,实现从追求公开数量向提升公开质量的转变。

The open trial system is related to the value orientation and functional orientation of a country's judiciary,and it cannot be simply transplanted from other countries,but must be prudentially determined on the basis of functional comparison.The openness of court trials in France,Russia,and the United States represent the three modes of institutional practices:“non-openness”under judicial conservatism,“openness”for the sake of strengthening supervision,and case-based exploration under legal pragmatism.They are rooted in the different political and social environments and legal traditions of the three countries,and reflect the different functions and roles of the judiciary.Under the“politics and law tradition”,China's judicial openness should aim at enhancing judicial credibility.Therefore,it is necessary to properly learn from the institutional design of open trial in other countries,pay attention to local cases in China,and balance the various roles of the open trial systems within an appropriate functional system according to the implementation effects of different systems,so as to realize the transformation from pursuing the quantity of open trials to improving the quality of open trials.