司法竞技主义是一种诉讼哲学,倡导法官消极裁判、当事人意思自治和通过竞技性举证和质证决定纠纷解决结果。司法竞技主义存在严重的理论缺陷,将纠纷解决方案定格于利益主体之间的对抗和竞技之上,既容易导致实质非正义,也拖延诉讼和增加诉讼成本。因应后现代秩序性质和政治哲学思想的发展,协商性司法作为一种新型诉讼哲学开始在西方国家司法改革实践逐步得到体现。协商性司法主张通过对话、协商、合作等方式解决纠纷。 Judicial competitiveism is a kind of litigation philosophy, which advocates the judge’s negative judgment, the party’s autonomy of autonomy and the outcome of dispute resolution through competitive evidence and cross-examination. Judicial competitiveism has serious theoretical flaws. Fixing the dispute resolution scheme on the confrontation and competition between the stakeholders, it can easily lead to substantive injustice, delay lawsuit and increase litigation costs. Due to the nature of the post-modern order and the development of political philosophy, consultative justice as a new philosophy of litigation began to be gradually reflected in the practice of judicial reform in western countries. The negotiated justice advocates resolving disputes through dialogue, consultation and cooperation.