效率VS权利?民事程序繁简分流改革争论的实证审视

Efficiency vs Right An Empirical Review of the Debate on the Civil Procedure Reform of the Separation of Complicated and Simple Cases

2020年初开始试点的民事诉讼程序繁简分流改革,已被2022年伊始全面推行的民事诉讼立法修正案所正式确认。然而,立法过程中“效率派”与“权利派”在改革思路上的争论至今未歇。如何评价此次改革与相关的学术争议?笔者所率团队的实证研究表明,“效率派”与“权利派”主张的观点均有一定道理,但并未得到改革数据的充分支撑。一方面,以效率为导向的繁简分流改革虽在有限程度上提高了效率,但总体上难称显著,且各项改革在效率的提高程度上参差不齐,这似乎显示改革效果已近天花板。另一方面,改革并未明显妨害权利。尽管小额诉讼程序与独任制改革似乎在抽象层面削减了若干程序性权利,但权利整体上尚未受到明显减损。而包括电子诉讼改革在内的部分举措甚至有利于权利实现。概言之,此次效率化的改革不一定与权利妨害相挂钩,也并非与权利保障背道而驰。有鉴于此,未来应该在充分实证研究的基础上,更为科学、客观地评估改革的成败得失与是否达至预设目标,检验改革是否契合特定的价值取向,继而设计并试点接地气、可操作、能达至的改革方案,最终有效推进民事诉讼制度的完善与发展。

The civil procedure reform of the separation of complicated and simple cases,which was piloted in early 2020,has been officially confirmed by the comprehensive implementation of the Civil Procedure Law(2021 Amendment)at the beginning of 2022.However,in the legislative process,the debate between the“efficiency”and the“right”on reform ideas has not stopped.How to evaluate this reform and related academic disputes?The empirical research of the team led by the author shows that the viewpoints advocated by the“efficiency”group and the“right”group are not fully supported by the reform data.On the one hand,although the reform of separation the complicated and simple cases which oriented towards the need for efficiency has improved efficiency to a limited extent,the overall effect is hardly significant,and the efficiency improvements of various reforms are uneven,which seems to show that the effect of the reform has stretched to the limit.On the other hand,the reforms did not clearly impede rights.Although the small claims process and the exclusivity reforms appear to have reduced some procedural rights at an abstract level,rights have not been significantly diminished.And some measures,including the reform of electronic litigation,are even conducive to the realization of rights.In a nutshell,this reform aimed at efficiency is not necessarily linked to the obstruction of rights,nor is it contrary to the protection of rights.In view of this,in the future,based on sufficient empirical research,it is necessary to evaluate the success or failure of the reform more scientifically and objectively,to test whether it has achieved the preset goals and whether the reform conforms to a specific value orientation;and then design and pilot ground-based,feasible,and achievable reform plans;at last,effectively promote the improvement and development of the civil procedure system.