Research On The Trial System Of "3+4" Large Collegial Panel

In our country's judicial trials,the phenomenon of “accompany without trial” and “review without discussion” is common in various courts.The main reason for this phenomenon is that jurors' lack of legal knowledge and legal professional ability leads to their lack of confidence in their opinions,and they are afraid to express their opinions for fear of making mistakes,thus resulting in their dependence on the presiding judge becoming a decoration of the court.In order to effectively solve this phenomenon,a new round of trial reform of the jury system has been launched in the judicial circle of our country.The reform of the pilot court has achieved remarkable results.The Law of the People's People's Juror of the People's Republic of China was officially issued in April 2018.For the first time,the “3+4” collegiate bench trial system was established in the form of law.where three judges and four jurors jointly tried the case,the jurors no longer participate in the voting applicable to the law,and only participate in the fact finding of the case together with the judge.Under the mode of distinguishing from the legal review,although the jury's enthusiasm for participating in the trial has been greatly improved,and the problem of “accompanied without trial” has been effectively improved,there are still some problems that need to be studied in depth.To this end,this paper has done some in-depth research on relevant issues.This article is divided into four parts,except for the introduction and conclusion.The first part is “An Overview of the ‘3+4' Large Collegiate Trial System”.This part first introduces the historical background of the “3+4” large collegiate bench trial system.Secondly,it studies the characteristics of the “3+4”large collegiate court trial system,and points out that compared with the traditional three-person jury collegiate panel,The “3+4” collegiate court trial system increased the number of jurors,and the jurors no longer participated in the voting on the application of the law.The scope of the trial was limited,and the judge's instructions to the jurors were more emphasized.It is the most obvious feature of the “3+4” large collegial panel system.Finally,the paper analyzes the function of the “3+4”large collegiate bench trial system.Under the “3+4” large collegiate bench trial system,increasing the number of people's jurors is conducive to improving the enthusiasm of jurors to participate in the trial and fully excavating the truth.Help justice and improve the acceptability of judicial decisions.The second part is the study of “Factual issues and Legal issues in the Operation of the ‘3+4' Large Collegiate Trial System”.Under the trial mode of the large collegiate bench,which distinguishes between the factual review and the legal review,if the traditional method of factual trial research is applied to the “3+4” large collegiate bench,it is difficult to accurately determine the boundary between the factual and legal issues.Therefore,this chapter studies factual issues and legal issues from the formation process of civil case referee facts,and points out that factual issues mainly include four meanings: objective facts,case facts,evidence facts and legal facts,while legal issues include legal interpretation and legal application.The third part is“Comparison and Analysis of the Fact Determination Rules of the Extraterritorial Jury System”.This chapter mainly analyzes the common law of the fact finding rules in the jury system of the Anglo-American legal system and the civil law system.In the jury system of the jury system,in order to guarantee the jury to form an accurate mental test,not only a series of establishments have been established.The sophisticated rules of evidence govern the jurors,and under the centralized litigation process,a strong communication mechanism is established through the judge's instructions to the jurors.In the fact-finding mechanism in which the civil law system represents the state,the trial procedure also focuses on the principle of centralized trials,and also establishes a distinctive“list of problems”to help distinguish between factual issues and legal issues.Through comparative analysis outside the domain,it is expected to provide a reasonable reference for the improvement of the fact finding rules of jurors in the “3+4” large collegiate system in China.The fourth part is “The Perfection of the ‘3+4' Large Collegiate Trial System”.It mainly studied the improvement of the fact finding rules,the clarification of the judges' instructions,the improvement of the “3+4” large collegiate bench trial procedures and the design and improvement of related supporting systems.In the aspect of the fact determination rules,through sorting out the formation mechanism of civil cases,this paper proposes to establish the distinguishing standard between the fact problem and the legal problem,and learn from foreign experience to improve the list mechanism of the case fact determination problem to help jurors determine the fact of the case;From the judge's indication of the content of the application phase,the effectiveness of the judge's instructions and the boundaries,and the relief of the judge's instructions,the author put forward a perfect proposal for the clarification of the judge's directive system;In the improvement of the “3+4” large collegiate bench trial procedure,it is proposed to construct a pre-trial preparation procedure centered on evidence exchange and dispute sorting,construct an efficient court trial procedure based on the principle of centralized trial and direct speech,and pay attention to the connection between the pre-trial preparation procedure and the trial procedure,and implement the trial summary system.In the collegiate session,the procedural rules preferentially expressed by the jurors at the collegial panel are established,which helps the jurors to make factual determinations more accurately;In the relevant supporting system,it proposes to introduce a lawyer's compulsory agency system,concrete factual claims,and strengthen the disclosure of psychological evidence in fact identification,and clarify the rights and obligations of judges and jurors,and optimize the operation of the trial system of the large collegial panel through relevant supporting systems.