陪审制导向何种司法民主?——观念类型学分析与中国路径

What Kind of Judicial Democracy does Jury System Lead To? An Typological Analysis and Chinese Approach

陪审制是司法民主的表现形式和实现途径。对于陪审制导向何种司法民主这一问题的回答不尽相同。从陪审制的证成过程以及该制度的诸多侧面中,可以析分出三种司法民主理念。代议式司法民主理念视陪审员为人民的代表,他们应召对司法问题行使投票权。该理念是民主政治理论向司法领域的延伸,通常以议会制为范本。协商式司法民主理念认为,陪审制的核心在于召集具有不同立场、倾向和知识的人参与集中评议程序,并寻求一致性裁决。陪审制是一个工具性的决策机制,而非政治制度。衡平式司法民主理念将陪审制看作程序上的衡平机制,认为陪审制可以矫正法律教义学裁判的失当。其倚重陪审员的否弃权和常识性正义观。总而言之,从不同角度发掘陪审制的意义,会将这一制度和实践引向不同愿景。对司法民主的观念类型学分析,有助于辨清中国人民陪审员制度改革的目标。

Jury system is the manifestation and realization of judicial democracy.There are different answers to the question of what kind of judicial democracy jury system should lead to.From the justification process of the jury system and many aspects of the system,we can distinguish three kinds of judicial democracies.The representative democracy regards jurors as people’s representatives.They are called together to vote on judicial issues.This idea is an extension of political democracy to judicial area and usually copy parliamentarism.The deliberative democracy thinks that the key character of jury system is to summon different individuals with different standpoint,tendency and knowledge to participant in an intensive deliberative process and search for unanimous verdicts.Jury system is a decision mechanism other than political system.The equity democracy views jury system as procedural equity law which can correct inappropriate legal dogmatic decisions.It relies on jurors’nullification power and commonsense justice conception.In a word,exploring the significance of jury from different angles will lead the system and practice to different visions.The typological analysis of the judicial democracy is helpful to distinguish the objectives of the reform of China’s jury system.