论异步审理模式与直接言词原则的冲突与衔接
Conflict and Compliance between Asynchronous Trial Pattern and Direct Speech Principle
摘要: 信息技术的高速发展促使科技与司法相互渗透。异步审理模式出现并发展于司法实践,打破时间与空间的束缚,通过“非面对面”和“非同步”的方式进行纠纷解决。该模式兼备开庭审理与书面审理的属性,但其实质依旧是以文字为载体的言词互动,归为开庭审理更为合理。异步审理作为司法实践中的革新,以传统诉讼视角评判难以合乎要求。从异步审理模式的本质出发,该模式因诉讼各方之间能够充分交换信息与及时提问,并不违背直接言词原则。
Abstract:
The rapid development of information technology and judicial technology promotes mutual penetration. The asynchronous trial pattern appears and develops the judicial practice, breaks through the time and the space fetter, through “non-face-to-face” and “non-synchronous” carries on the dispute settlement. This mode has the attribute of both hearing and written hearing, but its essence is still the verbal interaction with words as the carrier, so it is more reasonable to classify it as hearing. As an innovation in judicial practice, asynchronous trial is difficult to be judged from the perspective of traditional litigation. Proceeding from the essence of asynchronous trial mode, this mode does not violate the principle of direct verbalization because it can exchange information and ask questions in time.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
谢登科, 赵航. 论互联网法院在线诉讼“异步审理”模式[J]. 上海交通大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2022, 30(2): 78-88.
|
|
[2]
|
肖建国, 丁金钰. 论我国在线“斯图加特模式”的建构——以互联网法院异步审理模式为对象的研究[J]. 法律适用, 2020(15): 96-109.
|
|
[3]
|
张卫平. 民事诉讼法[M]. 北京: 法律出版社, 2019: 31-32.
|
|
[4]
|
景汉朝. 互联网法院的时代创新与中国贡献[J]. 中国法学, 2022(4): 49-73.
|
|
[5]
|
陶杨, 付梦伟. 互联网法院异步审理模式与直接言词原则的冲突与协调[J]. 法律适用, 2021(6): 163-173.
|
|
[6]
|
贺寿南. 民事诉讼第三种裁判模式: 共识性裁判及形成基础[J]. 湘潭大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 2015, 39(5): 37-42.
|
|
[7]
|
刘鹏飞. 电子诉讼庭审中心主义的程序实现——以借鉴和反思淘宝ODR经验为视角[J]. 社会科学, 2021(5): 94-104.
|
|
[8]
|
徐拿云. 直接言词原则的理论阐释与实现路径[J]. 西南民族大学学报(人文社科版), 2018, 39(8): 74-81.
|
|
[9]
|
刘学在. 论民事诉讼中的直接言词原则[J]. 中南民族大学学报(人文社会科学版), 2011, 31(6): 111-117.
|
|
[10]
|
段厚省. 远程异步审判的程序正当性考察[J]. 政法论丛, 2022(3): 51-64.
|
|
[11]
|
李文伟. 论德国刑事诉讼中直接言词原则的理论范畴[J]. 山东社会科学, 2013(2): 136-142.
|