Case Supervision And Retention Or Abolition Of Rational Thinking

Today, the field of scholars and jurisdiction can not determine at last whether the parliament should supervise respective case in the court owing to the dispute between supporters and the others to oppose. Because two schools can not persuade each other, the theory and practice of respective supervision put in trouble. To think over these disputes, we can find that all differences are given rise to by the different points about the interrelation between respective supervision and jurisdiction independence. In fact, what to reply this question represents two different opinions with regard to Chinese jurisdiction alteration: one is jurisdiction independence, the other is the enforcement of jurisdiction supervision.According to the state above, this discourse analyses the relation between respective supervision and jurisdiction independence and thinks that, by thinking over regarding theory about respective supervision and jurisdiction independence, respective supervision and jurisdiction independence is not an absolutely repulsive relation but a contradictory relation including interdependence and inter-opposition. They all serve in the course of jurisdiction and for justice. So, the key of our jurisdiction alteration is how to find the equilibrium between them, which make respective supervision not only maintain jurisdiction independence but also prevent the corruption of and the right abuse of jurisdiction. At the same time, author makes a so-call equitable location for respective supervision in our present phase.