The Empirical Research On Excellent Grassroots Judges’ Role

The fourth Plenary Session of the 18 th CPC Central Committee passed “the decision about comprehensively promoting the rule of law on a number of major issues”, it also clearly put forward to construct the socialist legal system with Chinese characteristics and the socialist country ruled by law. besides, the session put forward higher requirements to the grassroots judges. At this stage, China is in a special period of social transition, and the grassroots judges are facing with many problems about their role orientation. Therefore, how to achieve the grassroots judges ’ scientific considerations and management as well as the rational role regression of the grassroots judges within the legal framework and also how to establish the supremacy of the law throughout the country become the urgent tasks that need to be investigated and solved.By using the methods of literature analysis, value analysis, comparative analysis and manner of semantic analysis, this paper makes an empirical study of 34 best grassroots judges winners. Nowadays in China, the grassroots judges have eight characteristics: excellent political quality, professional ability, great mediation skills, assessment index success, protecting fairness and justice, serving the masses, with moral cultivation, and willing to selfless dedication. The best grassroots judges meets the requirements of charismatic personalities, which, traditionally, are called decent officials. The decent officials really stand for a progressive and fair concept of justice, but in essence, they are not independent legal professional groups, but the officials with strong administrative color. At the present stage, the judges in appearance seems to have the basic form of the modern judges, but there are still many problems such as administrative justice, excessive emphasis on mediation, writing style trial, despising the rights of the parties. All these phenomenon are incompatible with the requirements of the modern law and are discarded by the modern rule of law. Thus, these outstanding grassroots judges’ role appeared overloaded, conflicting, tension paradox. The role of the grassroots judges should only be positioned in law, but in reality, it has been taken up so much by political role and social role, and sometimes it even be separated from the legal role. The reasons of this problem are mainly for the institutional level, the management level, too many expectations, too many assessment indicators and the judges themselves.In our country, in order to establish a society ruled by law and to establish the supremacy of law in the whole country, the grassroots judges’ role must be rational return. In order to realize this return, the judicial authority of the judges must be recognized and guaranteed. The judges are neither the vassals of the country nor a spokesperson for civil society, they should play the role as a bridge in the country and the society. In the lawsuit, he should be a neutral arbiter, and in social life, he should stay away from the crowd. The role of judges is to realize social justice through judgment. That is to say, the judges can only take the law as the superior, the judge referee only according to the fair, they can not be affected by any other factors. Specifically, in order to realize the grassroots judges’ role rational return, we need to research the judges from working way and trialing way. As to working way, we must ensure the independent status of judges and improve the management of judges, which is the prerequisite and the guarantee. As to trialing way, the judges must keep neutral and independent, they must use legal thinking to solve the problems, and finally form a professional community of judges with high sense of honor.