论文部分内容阅读
文章通过对正义和司法观念的反思可知,各国司法对调解都有了不同程度的参与,司法对调解的参与模式主要有法院进行调解、法院附设调解、法院指令调解和其他模式(如司法确认、程序监督等)四种模式。与各国制度相比较,我国目前的调解制度一方面将法院调解视为审判权而非诉讼指挥权的组成部分,不利于调解本身的优势发挥;另一方面,没有将司法与调解的衔接制度化、规范化,而是通过法院的试点工作来进行尝试,造成了相当程度的司法资源的浪费。
The article through the reflection on the concept of justice and justice shows that the judiciary in different countries have different degrees of participation in the mediation. Judicial participation in the conciliation mainly involves the mediation of the courts, the adjudication of the courts, the mediation of court orders and other modes (such as judicial confirmation, Program supervision, etc.) four modes. Compared with national systems, the current mediation system in our country, on the one hand, regards court mediation as an adjudication rather than an integral part of litigation right, which is not conducive to the advantages of mediation itself. On the other hand, it does not institutionalize the link between justice and mediation , But through the pilot work of the court to try, resulting in a considerable degree of waste of judicial resources.