On Institution Of Court Decision Reasoning

Improving the level of judgment reasoning has always been the key content of China’s judicial reform,but in judicial practice,the reform effect is not ideal.In 1999,the Supreme People’s Court promulgated the Outline of the First Five-year Reform of People’s Courts,which stipulated the reform content of judgment documents,indicating that the topic of "improving the argumentation quality of judgment documents" has long been concerned by all circles.Recently,the Supreme People’s Court issued the Guiding Opinions on Strengthening and Standardizing the Reasoning of Interpretation of Judgment Documents(hereinafter referred to as the Guiding Opinions),pushing the reform of the reasoning system of judgment documents to a new height.As far as reasoning in judgment is concerned,vague reasoning,less reasoning and even no reasoning still exist in judgment.The specific reasons are mainly that judges cannot reason,do not want to reason,dare not reason,idle reasoning and so on.In spite of the promulgation of opinions and systems aimed at promoting judgment reasoning,such as the performance appraisal system for judgment reasoning,the online system of judgment documents,the guiding case system and the separation system of complicated and simple cases,the results are limited.Therefore,in order to really promote the improvement of judgment reasoning level in our country,we should also comprehensively examine the various systems of incentive judgment reasoning,especially those systems which are not aimed at promoting judgment reasoning,but may affect judgment reasoning and their possible incentive effect.Therefore,this paper will put forward suggestions from two aspects to improve the system of judgment reasoning in our country.One is to improve the system of judgment reasoning,including improving the reward and punishment mechanism of judgment reasoning and establishing reasonable standards of judgment reasoning;The second is to improve the argumentation system of judgment,including giving judges the power to refer to a variety of argumentation resources,reducing the writing task of judges’ non-judgment,developing diversified judgment evaluation practice and allowing,encouraging and constructing the system of judgment "objection".