The Connotation Of Theory Of Activist And Implementation

The judicial system of our nation has been developing tortuouslyand struggling for a long time. Reviewing the development progressof our judicial system since the foundation of the state, the justicemodel process of “from active to passive and from passive to active”has been followed.Wang Shengjun, the president of the Supreme People’s Court putforward the concept of “Active Justice" on his visit to Nanjing andWuxi in Jiangsu Province in August,2009, which has received anenthusiastic response from the theoretic and practical fields. Fromthen on, the “Active Justice" has been hot spot to theoreticalinvestigation and practice exploration. However, there still existingthe fact that the inaccurate definition, the unclear specialty, and theambiguous implementing methods of “Active Justice”. The paperattempts to clarify the concepts of “Judicial Activism " and “ActiveJustice”, defining the concept and feature of “Active Justice ", andfind the implementing methods.Firstly, this paper briefly discusses the background of “ActiveJustice”, and starting with the analysis and comparisons of “JudicialActivism” and “Active Justice”, analyzes the similarities anddifferences of the both, as well as reviewing the relationship betweenthe two and defining the accurate concept. Secondly, it representsthe legitimacy of “Active Justice” respectively from the aspects oftheoretical basis, historical origin and reality. Thirdly, it analyzes andassesses the practice of “Active Justice”. At last, the authorsummaries the implementing methods of “Active Justice”, includingthree levels: improving the working ability, promoting the work routines, and building operation systems of “Active Justice”. Thispaper aims to provide a theoretical guidance to “Active Justice”practice, for achieving the active role of jurisdiction to the nationalpolitical development and the rule-of-law construction.