摘要
南京国民政府成立后,继续推进肇始于晚清的地方司法改革,除了裁撤各省司法厅,还将检察院并入法院内部,形成了以高等法院为核心的人财物省级统管模式,即各省高等法院统管全省司法机关人财物,同时是全省最高审判机关、检察机关和司法行政机关。以江苏高等法院为主要研究对象,辅以相关一手素材,对南京国民政府时期高等法院省级统管模式进行基于典型个案的实证研究,可以发现,被寄予厚望的高等法院省级统管模式运行效果不佳,存在着司法机关孤立化、司法行政体制僵化和改革进度不及预期等现实问题。之所以如此,除制度设计本身不尽合理的内部原因外,还有司法权较行政权处于弱势地位和司法经费依赖地方财政等外部原因,其中的经验教训值得引以为鉴。
After the founding of the Republic of China,the National Government at Nanjing continued to promote the local judicial reform that had begun in the late Qing Dynasty.In addition to abolishing the provincial judicial departments,it also incorporated the procuratorates into the courts,forming a unified management model of the judicial personnel,finance,and properties with the provincial high court as the core.After the reform,the high courts at the provincial level were in charge of the people and property of the judicial organs within the province,and at the same time were the highest judicial organs,procuratorial organs,and judicial administrative organs combined together.Taking the Jiangsu High Court as an example and using the relevant first-hand materials,we carried out an empirical study based on the typical cases of the model of unified administration by the provincial high court during the period of Nanjing National Government.It can be found that this administration model on which the National Government placed high expectations did not work well:for example,the judicial organs were isolated to some extent;the judicial administrative system was rigid;and the judicial reforms failed to make progress as expected.In addition to the unreasonable system design itself,there were also some external causes for the problems:for example,the judicial power was in a weaker position than the administrative power and the judicial organs depended heavily on local finances.The experience and lessons are worthy of our notice today.
出处
《法治现代化研究》
2021年第2期100-115,共16页
Law and Modernization
关键词
南京国民政府
江苏高等法院
人财物省级统管
司法改革
National Government at Nanjing
Jiangsu High Court
unified provincial administration of judicial personnel,finance and properties
judicial reform