The Functional Analysis Of The Reform Of Judicial Accountability System In People's Court

The reform of judicial accountability system is not only an important part in the whole scheme of judicial reform,but also the major initiatives decided in the third plenary session of the 18 th CPC central committee,which play the strategic role in comprehensively deepening reform.In six years,it is necessary to evaluate and analyze whether the reform of judicial accountability system has achieved the expected effect and to what extent.In this regard,this paper chooses "function" as the research entry point,because function is an important index to evaluate whether a system is worth creating,existing and reforming.The same is true for a policy or programme.If the reform can effectively realize its expected function and produce positive objective consequences in the actual operation,it will have the reason to exist and persist in the social structure.If the reform degree cannot effectively achieve its functional expectations,and even produces many adverse objective consequences,it may be abandoned or continue to reform to fit the existing social structure.The research object of this paper is the function of the judicial accountability system reform.Why the judicial accountability reform?What are the expected functions of judicial accountability reform?Has the reform of judicial accountability system realized the expected function at the beginning of system design?What are the objective consequences of the judicial accountability system reform in the actual operation?Why these objective consequences?How to evaluate these objective consequences?In answer to these questions gradually,the purpose of this study was based on the function of the judicial system reform expectations and the description of the objective function,and examine the effect of the practical operation of the judicial system reform and evaluation,puts forward how to carry out the improvement and optimization approach and strategies,in order to the study of the theory of the reform of the judicial system to realize the increment of the knowledge on the research methods and research results,at the same time as the reform of the judicial system in some specific system design provides a possible choices and theoretical evidence.This paper mainly uses conceptual analysis method,comparative analysis method and functional analysis method in the research method,and uses Merton's functional analysis paradigm as the main research framework to conduct functional analysis on the reform of judicial accountability system,aiming to describe and evaluate the expected and objective functions of the reform of judicial accountability system.Functional analysis and research is not only an appropriate perspective for the objective evaluation of a thing,but also an effective way to its preservation or abolition and how to improve.From the perspective of reform contents,the reform of judicial accountability system includes the reform of the operation mechanism of judicial power,that is,to make judges judge,and the reform of judicial accountability system,that is,to make judges responsible.On the premise of problem consciousness as the basic methodology reform,judicial power operation mechanism reform of problem consciousness is the practice of judicial judgment,the existence of "reviewer is not found,urteiler not careful" phenomenon has affected the normal operation of the jurisdiction,has violated the law of justice,led to the judicial power operation mechanism is not sound,the function of judicial power operation mechanism reform is expected to ensure the jurisdiction independence.The problem consciousness of the judicial accountability system reform lies in the predicament of the judicial accountability system in the past practice,and its function is expected to eliminate these dilemmas and effectively hold the judges accountable.However,while affirming the positive effects of the reform of judicial accountability system,we should also rationally realize that the reform of judicial accountability system also produces many counter-functions that are not consistent with the original intention of the reform.Negative function comes in trial operation mechanism reform is the functional approach have been hampered,dispelling the positive effect of the reform,and should carry out a reform train of thought to,the key factors for obstructive function way,seriously as a main body and object of the judge's reform demand,increase the development of the policy,strengthening the theory preparation of judicial reform,reform Yu Fayou according to.This provides the justification foundation for the reform further,solves the judicial reform measure implementation difficulty.Judicial accountability system the function of reason is divided into two parts,part is the reform of the judicial accountability for the function of the reason is that the function of the judicial accountability system itself is expected to set exceeds the limits of the system can carry,which caused a certain impact to the existing judicial structure,the part of the functional failure phenomenon;The other part is that the judicial accountability body and the procedure reform counter-function appear because of the insufficient judicial orientation of the reform.Different solutions should be adopted for different reasons.In terms of the substantive reform of judicial accountability,the expected function of judicial accountability should be appropriately reduced.The expected function of judicial accountability should focus on the maintenance and restoration of judicial credibility,and appropriate replacement should be found for other functions that cannot be carried by judicial accountability.The setting of system expectation directly determines the mode and content of the system.On the basis of reasonably reducing the burden of judicial accountability system,we should establish a unified punishment system for judges.The misconduct of a judge and the error of judgment result are included in the cause of judge's punishment.Errors of judgment are treated differently.Under the premise of good behavior of judges,if the errors are obvious and low-level,they may be held accountable,and vice versa.In terms of the judicial accountability procedure reform,the judicial accountability procedure should be reformed.