当事人请求权与检察机关抗诉权的耦合与界分——最高人民法院《关于适用民事诉讼法的解释》第406条规定之不当

Coupling and Boundary of Party's Right to Request and the Procuratorial Organ's Right to Protest——Analysis of the 406th Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on the Interpretation of the Application of the Civil Procedure Law

最高人民法院制定的《关于适用中华人民共和国民事诉讼法的解释》(以下简称《解释》)于2015年2月公布施行。该《解释》对人民法院适用修订后的民事诉讼法的相关问题作出了明确具体的规定,成为人民法院民事审判工作的指导性文件。然而,囿于《解释》制定主体的系统或部门立场的潜移默化的影响,必然局限了《解释》的制定者以更为宏观、广阔的法治视野去探索一项法律规定的科学规划,从而导致《解释》不可避免地存在瑕疵,也进而限制了该《解释》在司法实践中的实际适用效果。对此,必须引起立法者的关注,并应及时加以校正。通过对该《解释》第406条规定的梳理,指出了该条规定所存在的问题,并提出了作者自己的修正意见。

In February 2015, Supreme People＇s Court promulgated Interpretation on the Application of the Civil Procedure Law of the People Republic of China （hereinafter referred as Interpretation）, which clearly stipulates some issues on applying the Civil Procedure Law amended, and becomes guidance document for trial. However, because of the imperceptible effect of the system of main body and department position, Supreme People’s Court cannot explore a scientific planning of legal provisions in a more macro and broader vision of the rule of law, which unavoidably causes some defects in Interpretation, and then limits the actual application effect in judicial practice. So legislators should focus on it, and correct the defects at once. The author points out the defects on the article 406 of Interpretation, and proposes the revising opinion by carding the article 406 of Interpretation.