院庭长审判监督管理权配置模式研究——以审批事项设置标准为切入

Research on the Allocation Mode of Trial Supervision and Management Power of the President and Director of the Court: Taking the Setting Standard of Examination and Approval Items as the Cut in

本文首先从实证层面对基层司法实务中审批事项现状进行了反思,发现存在审批事项较多、部分审批事项存在的必要性存疑等方面的问题。接着,从两方面分析了如何正确理解对审判权运行机制“去行政化”;从院庭长行使审批权的基本原则、审批权的内容、审批权的动态调整三方面分析了院庭长行使审批权的职权配置;从设计评价指标时需考量的八个维度、审批标准选取原则及衡量结果分类两个层面科学构划了正确行使审批权的相关制度。最后,结合上述指标对审批事项的必要性和合规性逐一展开鉴别分析,并根据分析结果将审批事项分为“弱化管理类”“动态管理类”及“强化管理类”三个层次,列出审批权力清单,以划定审判监督管理权行使边界,为审判权运行改革提供实践参考。

This article first reflects on the present situation of the examination and approval of items in judicial practice based on the extensive investigation. It is found that there are many items for examination and approval and there are doubts about the necessity of some items in judicial practice. Then, it analyzes how to correctly understand the “de-administration” of the operation mechanism of judicial power from two aspects. And then analyzes the allocation of the functions and powers of the president and director of the court from three aspects: the basic principle of exercising the power of examination and approval, the content of the power of examination and approval, and the dynamic adjustment of the power of examination and approval. At the same time, this article discusses eight dimensions that top-level designers should consider in the evaluation index of design approval items. Analyzes on the selection principle of the approval standard, further discusses the application of the measuring results in the design approval itemsand scientifically constructs the concrete path for the correct exercise of the examination and approval power. Finally, combined with the above indicators, the author analyzes the necessity and compliance of the approval items one by one. According to the results of the analysis, the approval items are divided into three levels:“weakening management”,“dynamic management” and “strengthening management”, and a list of examination and approval powers is drawn up. In order to delineate the boundary of the exercise of trial supervision and management power, and provide practical reference for the reform of trial power operation.