The Path Selection Of Active Judiciary In The Context Of Contemporary China

The concept of "Active Judiciary "in China was proposed by Wang Shengjun, the president of the Supreme People’s Court in2009, the reasons and background of proposing the concept included coping with the international financial crisis, responding to the judicial needs of the transitional society, and adjusting the judicial reform. Our country’s active judiciary concept is mainly reflected in the decision maker’s relevant speeches, actions as well as the practices of the courts at all levels, lacking of system theories, so from a comparative point of view, this article wants to explore the nature of the concept by analyzing the differences between Active Judiciary and the concepts of judicial activism, judicial restraint and legalism. Meanwhile, by observing the practice of active judicial throughout our country in recent years, its implementation can be seen indeed achieved some results. However, due to the lack of perfect system specification, some courts have ignored the law of judicial running, expanded the functions of the court excessively, ignored the core work of trial and law enforcement, resulting in the chaos in judiciary. By summing up and reflecting the problems of active judiciary in practice, this article proposed the countermeasures which can eliminate its negative impact and make it run in orbit of the modern rule of law. That is:China needs Active Judiciary, but can not do without conventional judiciary which take judicial restraint as its premise; compared to pursuit social effects, Chinese judiciary should emphasize the supremacy of the rule more; under the premise of maintaining judicial independence, emphasizing on procedural justice, achieving professionalization of judicatory, Chinese judiciary should advocate the active policy which includes case closed principles, convenience litigation and judicial services.