中美陪审制基本价值的比较——兼论我国新陪审制的出路

The Compare of Basic Value of Jury System between China and American--Discuss the way out of Chinese jury system at the same time

本文比较了中美两国陪审制对民主、公正、自由、人道这四种基本价值的体现,在肯定了我国参审制的意义的同时,提出我国陪审员应当在基数更加广泛的人群里随机抽取;我国审判员在合议庭中人员比例可以很小,而陪审员的比例应当更大;我国还应当改变现在简单多数进行裁决的做法,在立法中对重大案件引入一致裁决制度以保障少数人的自由;在没有废除死刑的情况下,死刑案件应当率先由只有陪审员参加的合议庭作出一致裁决才可以决定适用死刑,进行死刑复核的合议庭应当有陪审员参加,以保障死刑在公正与人道之间的慎重选择。我国和大陆法系国家一样,目前由于不具备实行陪审团制的条件,只能实行参审制,但它具有过渡性,应当创造条件,最终实行陪审团制。

The thesis compare the four basic value of democracy, fair, freeness and humanism embodying in the Chinese and American jury system. At the same time of supporting our participating interrogation system, author suggests we should choice jurors from wider crowd at random; the proportion of juror can be low in collegiate bench, but proportion of juror in collegiate bench should be higher; we should change the present way of arbitrating through simple majority, introduce unanimous arbitrate system in important case to ensure freedom of minority; with the considering of the existence of death penalty, the death penalty case should first of all arbitrate by unanimous arbitrate by collegiate bench only consisted of juror, collegiate bench checking death penalty should participate by juror to ensure fair and humanism. Just like continent country law system, our country isn't provided with qualifications of practicing jury system, and can only carry out participating interrogation system. But the system is temporary, we should create condition and put jury system into practice in the end.