Law Professor: separation of jurisdiction to promote judicial independence | independent | | justice _ of politics and news

　　Separation of jurisdiction independence

Qin Xiya

Summary: building the rule of law in China, must deepen judicial reform, speeding up the construction of a fair, efficient and authoritative Socialist judicial system, safeguard the people's interests. Upholding a constitutional law authority, deepening reform of administrative law enforcement to ensure in accordance with law, the right to an independent and impartial exercise adjudicative and procuratorial, sound operation mechanism of judicial power.

Ying Songnian (Professor of CUPL):

Referring to the administration of Justice "in accordance with law, independent and impartial", three core is fair, is a sine qua non for the achievement of a just law and independence.

Various contradictions and problems arising from the current social justice is required to resolve, justice is required to resolve, once the injustice of Justice will not be able to resolve the contradiction, but will create new contradictions.

The question now is, to be fair, to do with the fact that under take law as the criterion. This is the principle of law.

The principle of independence discussed more fully in academic. Run in the judicial process, power, human intervention in the judiciary are widespread. In this case, how to make justice in accordance with the law, to achieve independence, requires a series of concrete measures to promote. Among them, went on administration, localization are essential elements for achieving independence.

Localization refers to the work to be carried out according to the law courts and prosecutors, not under the influence of local government, just exercise adjudicative and procuratorial powers. Justice can be achieved after the authority, authority, situations, the credibility of the judiciary.

Localization includes two implications: first, local executive powers not to interfere in judicial and, secondly, judicial power to say no. Say no to power, courts and prosecutors needs to be established, its personnel and financial power is a key element of belonging.

We have had "Taizhou experience"-"offsite trial" ways to avoid the intervention of the local government. This is a way to prevent from interfering with the judiciary, but there were also evident: first, it is clear that the intervention approach is to place the "default"; and second, long distance will be able to avoid interfering with the trial yet?

Localization can take way jurisdictions separate from the administrative area, is there a broad consensus in the academic world. Separation of jurisdiction have come up before, the Central People's bank branch to take this to prevent any bank branch into a local "pockets". Centralized will the District Court have been raised, I prefer reverted to "a higher court", to the national people's Congress election, judges are, you can take "promoted elections" approach to solving, purse strings is the same way.

Administration, is to follow the rules of Justice, judicial law reflected on the sets of judicial proceedings. For example, the open is the most important factor of Justice, court cases, results will be made public, so that the public and media monitoring, public is one of judicial laws.

In addition, the reform of administrative enforcement system needs a "package" plan. But it is a top priority, administrative law enforcement is extremely complicated, it should first sort out various Executive-terms, administrative law enforcement together to avoid "long management", I managed to realize scientific management.

(Edit: SN094)
November 13, 2013 First financial daily
(中国政法教授：管辖权分离促进司法独立|独立|政法|司法_新闻资讯

　　管辖权分离促司法独立

　　秦夕雅

　　摘要：建设法治中国，必须深化司法体制改革，加快建设公正、高效、权威的社会主义司法制度，维护人民权益。维护宪法法律权威，深化行政执法体制改革，确保依法、独立、公正行使审判权、检察权，健全司法权力运行机制。

　　应松年(中国政法大学终身教授)：

　　谈到司法的“依法、独立、公正”，三者中核心是公正，依法和独立是实现公正的必要条件。

　　当下社会所产生的各类矛盾和问题需要司法来解决，更需要司法公正来解决，司法一旦不公正，不但不能解决原来的矛盾，反而会产生新的矛盾。

　　现在的问题是，要做到公正，就要做到以事实为根据，以法律为准绳。这就是依法原则。

　　而独立原则在学界的讨论更为充分。在司法运行过程中，权力、人情对司法的干预普遍存在。在这种情况下，如何使司法依法办事，实现独立，需要一系列具体措施来推动。其中，去行政化、去地方化是实现司法独立中的必要要素。

　　去地方化是指法院和检察院的工作要依法开展，不受地方政府的影响，公正行使审判权、检察权。司法公正之后才能实现权威，有了权威，司法才具公信力。

　　去地方化包括了两层含义：首先，地方行政权力不干预司法；其次，司法能够对权力说不。要对权力说不，法院和检察院需要足够底气，其人事权和财权的归属是关键因素。

　　我们曾经有过“台州经验”——采取“异地审判”的方式来避免地方政府的干预。这是一个防止地方干预司法的办法，但缺点也很明显：第一，显然该办法是对地方存在干预的“默认”；第二，异地审判就能避免干预了吗？

　　要去地方化可以采取把司法辖区与行政辖区分离的办法，这在学界有广泛共识。管辖权分离也早有先例，中央人民银行分行就采取这个方式防止央行分行沦为地方的“口袋”。有人提出将地方法院收归中央，我更倾向于收归“上一级法院”，法官是要人大选举，可以采取“提级选举”的方式来解决，财权也是同样的道理。

　　去行政化，是要按照司法的规律办事，司法规律体现在司法程序的设置上。比如，公开是司法最重要的因素，法院审理案件的过程、结果要公开，从而让公众与媒体进行监督，公开是司法的规律之一。

　　此外，行政执法体制的改革需要“一揽子”计划。但目前当务之急在于，行政执法千头万绪，应该先理清各类行政机关的职责权限，将行政执法相对集中起来，避免“多头管理”、重复管理，实现科学管理。

（编辑：SN094）
2013年11月13日03:29
第一财经日报
)