事实审内容之确定路径的选择及完善

Choose and Perfect of the Path to Determine the Actual Content of the Trial

英美法系因事实和法律的界限不清,致使规范层面的事实审内容无法明确,陪审团审判程序中的法官只能以法官指示制度模糊确定个案层面的事实审内容。大陆法系下事实和法律界分明晰,其规范层面的事实审内容可以确定。我国陪审制度改革中的《实施办法》,杂糅了法官指示和事实清单制度作为法官确定人民陪审员参审范围的方法,而两大法系事实审内容的确定路径在层面和效力方面有本质的差异,因而两种路径无法融合。法官指示制度与我国的法律体系缺乏契合性,所以我国只能以事实清单制度建构我国事实审内容的确定路径。

In Common Law,the border of law and fact is unclear,which makes it impossible to determine the content of factual trail at the norm level,judges in jury trial procedures can only vaguely determine the factual content at the individual case level.In Continental law,the border of law and fact is clear,which makes it possible to determine the content of factual trail at the norm level.The 《Measures for Implementation》in the jury system reform integrates the system of judges' instructions and de facto lists,as a method for the judges to determine the scope of the jury's participation in the jury system.The path to determine the actual content of the trial in two major legal systems can not be integrated,because their level and effectiveness is different.The system of judges' instructions lacks the compatibility in our legal system,the fact sheet system is our only option.