On The Purpose Of Civil Retrial System In China

The civil retrial procedure refers to the procedure for the court to retrial the judgments,rulings,and mediation agreements that have had legal effect and have been wrong in accordance with the law in order to maintain the fairness of the effective judgment.The retrial procedure is of great significance for maintaining judicial justice and social stability.However,the provisions on the retrial system in China’s "Civil Procedure Law" have been revised many times,forming a status quo with multiple purposes.The multiplicity of purposes leads to the loss of the purpose of the procedure and the direction of the retrial system.When the retrial procedure tries to balance all the purposes,it is overwhelmed due to insufficient tension and a series of contradictions arise.Therefore,clarifying the purpose and positioning of the retrial system,clarifying the particularity of the retrial system,and re-improving the retrial system have a significant role in clarifying the reform direction of the retrial system and giving full play to the remedy function of the retrial system.In addition to the introduction and conclusion,this article is divided into five parts for discussion.The first part mainly clarifies the current status of the purpose of the retrial system.The retrial system embodies the purpose of trial supervision in legislation,and the purpose of correcting mistakes and maintaining the power of judgment in the setting of retrial reasons.Finally,in 2012,the Guiding Case No.7 issued by the Supreme People’s Court established that the retrial syste m should be aimed at resolving disputes.The second part is an in-depth analysis of the reasons for the diversification of the purpose of the retrial system from two aspects.First,the main reason for the multiple purposes of the retrial process is the failure of the existing two-trial final review system.In our country,due to the insufficient fact-finding function played by the first-instance procedure,coupled with the guidance of the concept of "correction must be corrected",the second-instance procedure has placed too much emphasis on the "correction" function,providing the parties with more adequate procedural guarantees.It is difficult to fully and effectively absorb the dissatisfaction of the parties.Therefore,the retrial procedure carries the functions of "third trial procedure" such as resolving disputes and correcting errors.The function determines the purpose,which in turn leads to the status quo of multiple purposes in the retrial system.Second,the status quo of our country’s multi-purpose retrial system is formed in the process of legislators discussing matters.Due to the unclear purpose and function of the retrial system,the legislator responded to various calls for each revision of the retrial system.The retrial system carried more and more diversified goals and expectations in the process of revising the law.Eventually,due to insufficient self-tension,it was overwhelmed and resulted in huge judicial costs.The third part is to analyze the shortcomings of the multiple formation of the purpose of the retrial system.During the operation of the retrial system,different subjects positioned the purpose of the retrial system based on different motives,which led to the loss of the purpose of the retrial system and gradually deviated from the original operating track.There are three drawbacks to the formation of multiple purposes.The first is the conflict of values behind the purpose,the second is the blurring of the function of the retrial process,and the third is the conflict b etween the power of supervision and the power of private disposition.The fourth part proposes that the retrial system should return to correct major flaws and restore the purpose of judicial justice.First of all,this purpose is mainly derived from the remedial function of the retrial system.The function determines the purpose and the remedial function of the retrial system,which requires the retrial procedure to correct only the clear and serious defects of the effective judgment to restore judicial justice.Secondly,the design of the retrial system must follow the principle of limited error correction.This is determined by the effective judgment theory of the judge.According to the principle of limited error correction,the retrial procedure should not correct errors,but should correct major defects.This is because the error is uncertain and extensive.Finally,the retrial system is public.The retrial procedure is not only a case trial,but also to restore judicial justice by correcting the major flaws of the case,which is a manifestation of safeguarding public interest.At the same time,the power of procuratorial supervision in the retrial procedure bears the same law and the public mission of supervising the judges.Therefore,the retrial system needs to limit the parties’ right to dispose,and the retrial process should be dominated by public power.The fifth part clarifies how to improve the retrial system under the guidance of correcting major flaws and restoring justice.First,the right to apply for retrial should be requalified.The right to apply for retrial should be the right to object to special procedures.Secondly,the procedural cause should become the main component of the retrial.Procedural rights,due to their statutory nature,naturally meet the specific requirements of the retrial,such as clarity,limitation,uniformity,and ease of operation.However,the issue of substantive retrial causes random determination because of its ambiguity and extensiveness,and should not be the main part.Third,the scope of procedural matters is defined through the principle of complementarity.Major flaws require procedures that seriously impair judicial justice.Under the requirement of the supplementary principle,the retrial cause excludes the right of litigation that can be exercised in ordinary litigation procedures,and requires the conditional application of "new evidence".Finally,under the guidance of the intended purpose of the retrial system,the retrial process should be led by publ ic power,and the parties ’right to dispose should be respected“ publicly and privately ”.