On Judicial Authority

Judicial authority reflects the legal situation of a country, in the west democratic country the judicial authority as the Supremacy of Law and the legal authority as indubitable, so the western scholars pay less attention to it. China is in the Period of Social Transformation the judicial authority is questioned for the judicial corruption and the low rate of execution of judgment, the judicial authority is facing great difficulties. This paper, based upon the situation of China's judicial authority and combining with research results puts forth some deliberations and proposals for remodeling of judicial authority. This article mainly divided into four parts:The partⅠintroduces some basic concepts and three types of judicial authority and analyzes its theoretical value. The paper did not analysis the most controversial connotation of authority, but chooses the two facts in authority:"power","prestige"as the basis of the full-text. The authority can be classified into three types: The traditional authority, charismatic authority, legal authority. Although the classification method is suitable for the whole social system, but it can be used to describe the situation about judicial. The Judicial system is the result of the needs of solving the dispute. The value of judicial authority is the important significance of setting the authority. The judicial authority can ensure the efficiency of settlement of dispute and reduce the cost of solving disputes to make the judgment was highly effective executed. Building a socialist legal state is China's political reform direction, the one standard of legal state is authority of law, and the authority of law in judicial practice shows the judicial authority. Therefore, the value of judicial authority is that: the judicial authority is the precondition of dispute settlement; the judicial authority is the foundation of building a legal state; the judicial authority ensures the execution of judgment; the judicial authority improves the authority of law.The partⅡdiscuses the evaluation standard of judicial authority. The main purpose of this part is to attempt to answer what is the standard of judicial authority. The logical starting point of this part is that the"justice","efficiency"and the"authority"complement each other. The judicial system is the last ditch of dispute resolution, so the court judgments the most authoritative in all types of dispute resolution. The reasonable and efficient judgment is the foundation of authority. On this basis, this paper enumerates the impartiality of judgment, efficient action and the finality and stability of judgment as the evaluation standard of judicial authority. The author considers that the standard of judicial authority must be understand from the negative aspects, that is meeting these standards about judicial authority is not the ultimate aim, but the minimum requirements.The partⅢp ays attention to the present situation of China's judicial authority. This paper did not choose the non-independence of judicial Operation mechanism and unfair adjudication to describe the reasons on the missing of China's judicial authority. Because these facts exist in the reform and opening since, they could not explain the low level of China's judicial authority. Through the observations of the practice, this paper selects the judicial corruption, letter visits about lawsuit and the low status of court of judiciary to show the dilemma of China's judicial authority. Judicial corruption is not tolerable, the letter visits about lawsuit is a character system of Chinese, These years the amount of letter visits about lawsuit is very high, the court has spend a lot of energy resources to deal with the letter visits about lawsuit will weakened the functions of solving the dispute. After the reform and opening A lot of disputes come into the court and the judicial system is in a so weak position that handicapped the functions, these facts weaken the judicial authority.The partⅣputs forward some suggestions for solving the dilemma of China's judicial authority. The proposals are divided into two groups: external guaranty, internal reformation. The external guaranty includes promoting the status of court of justice, the paper trying to establish the independent operation mechanism of judicial the key points is to explore that how to correctly handle the courts exercising judicial power independently of the party leadership, and how to improve the relationship of judicial system and the NPC system. And according the facts that the media plays a important party in supervision of judicial operation process and can cause media judgment so the paper suggests to improving the relationship between Jurisdiction and mass media and strengthening the legal publicity, strengthening legal propaganda can enhance the public to aware the law. The setting of judicial authority needs understanding and support from judicial system and from the public. The internal reformation includes improving the quality of judges, changing the administrative tendency and localization of judicial, promoting supervision procedure and solving enforcement difficulty. The highly quality of judges is an important guarantee for fair judgments; the administrative tendency and localization of judicial will affect the independent operation mechanism of judicial; the supervision procedure can affect the stability of judgments and the enforcement difficulty exacerbates the dilemma of judicial authority so all these problems have to be solved.