学位论文题名  现代社会的纠纷解决:基于法社会学的思考
论文作者      马国强
作者单位      吉林大学
专    业      法学理论
指导教师      张文显
并列题名      Dispute resolution in modern society: a legal-sociological reflection
学位级别      303
中文文摘
    人类为了求取生存，维护权利，便不断在各领域发生纠纷（dispute）。纠纷是人类的一种生存常态，一方面严重破坏了人类的生存秩序，另一方面也为社会的发展提供了恒久的动力。因此，探索纠纷解决（dispute resolution）的方式是人类社会发展的主题之一，尤其是法学研究所不可忽略的。纠纷解决理论研究的领域广涉诉讼法学、法人类学、法社会学、经济分析法学、比较法学、法文化学等诸多领域。纠纷解决的实践中也早已超越司法体制内的改革，迅速发展了其他纠纷解决机制。这些现象作何解释，实践将走向何方？需要我们进行法学研究，以加深对我们身处的法治社会的认识，并进一步指导我们的实践。本文力图论证以下的命题： 在法治文明的现代化进程中，围绕着纠纷解决内在的基本矛盾，可以衍生多元理论层次，但落实到制度层面只能是以司法为中心的多元纠纷解决机制。 为论证这一命题，本文第一部分首先探究纠纷的语义、与秩序的关系、纠纷解决的类型与历史发展，得出对现代纠纷解决的总括性认识。纠纷是社会主体基于资源稀缺的客观事实，在相互交往中为追求或维护利益从而产生矛盾进而引起社会秩序失衡或创生的行为。纠纷一方面是对现有社会秩序的破坏，但另一方面也是对现有秩序的合理性质疑，通过纠纷解决，或者维护了现有秩序，或者创生了新的社会秩序。纠纷解决是指防止和解决纠纷的场所、机构、程序、规则和过程的总称。对应人类社会的不同发展阶段，纠纷解决由私力救济逐渐相公力救济发展。超自然权威是一种企图以超自然力量来鉴别和判定是非真伪的纠纷解决方式。人的权威是指主持纠纷解决的人在解决纠纷的过程中所依凭的不是纯客观性规则，而是凭借自身的权威资源，如暴力、知识、信息、年龄等来解决纠纷。法的权威是指以法和类法规范以及由之确定的国家和自治体等为纠纷解决的依据。现代法治文明社会的纠纷解决机制已经从超自然权威、人的权威、法的权威发展到以诉讼解纷为中心的包含非诉讼解纷的多元有机体系。在文明的层面上，纠纷解决机制必须在法治的大前提下以司法为中心进行建构；而在文化层面上，原有的一些纠纷机制又可以通过创造性的转化来获取新生，或者在此基础上完成对诉讼模式的再次否定。这首先是源于对人类理性有限性的认识，其次是源于司法系统自身功能的转换，最后是源于诉讼作为解纷机制自身固有的弊端。第二部分进一步深入到现代纠纷解决的几对基本矛盾，力图揭示决定着现代社会多元解纷体系的内在动力。矛盾是内在于事物并推动事物发展的动力，现代社会的纠纷解决形式多样，层次多元，构成一个以司法为中心的解纷体系，主要可由以下几对矛盾加以说明。法治和自治是解纷方式的不同权威力量。法治要求司法解纷以法律为依据，强调普遍、形式的解决。自治要求非诉解纷体现个人及其他主体纠正失衡的具体意志，体现对结果的实质性保护。现代社会注重两者并用，相互取长补短，分别加强参与自治性和法治的程序性。公平和效率是纠纷解决的不同价值衡量。公平要求司法解纷普遍平等适用法律，保证平等的对待，效率要求非诉解纷补充司法解纷效率之不足，强调更简便、快捷解决纠纷。由此促使重新认识解纷机制的效率价值取向，并加强对非诉解纷的保障，防止不公。程序正义和实体正义则对应于不同的偏好取向。在法治系统中司法解纷较注重程序正义，而导致与实质正义的矛盾加大。非诉解纷则追求弥补司法解纷中程序正义和实质正义之矛盾和欠缺。由此二者共同服务于现代社会纠纷解决之程序和实质中的正义追求。可见，正是在这些基本矛盾的相互作用和运动中，司法解纷和非诉解纷分别满足不同的需求，并不断得到纠正和补充。第三部分从实践中的制度层面具体演示了现代纠纷解决机制的几种具体形态，予以总结。现代社会纠纷解决机制是以司法为中心的多元解纷有机体系。基于现代社会中纠纷的多样性与复杂性,各国的司法改革如火如荼;同时，目前各国兴起的替代性纠纷解决运动是指一切诉讼外的纠纷解决方式，反映了对包括法律情感、利益考量和运行机制在内的法治的反思与再认识，并体现为调解、仲裁、谈判和其他形式的非诉解纷机制。但现代非诉解纷机制只是对司法解纷在减轻讼累、提高效率和确认新的规范方面的补充和纠正，司法倾向于将它纳入其轨道，二者协调并行。司法制度作为主要的解纷体制，在现代社会中仍发挥着不可替代的作用。我国的法院调解兼具司法与替代性解纷机制两种特征,在现代社会,应借鉴各国经验，同时立足与本国法治实践，予以肯定并改革。法院调解是指在人民法院审判组织的主持下，双方当事人自愿平等协商，达成协议，经人民法院认可后，终结司法程序的活动。它原是兼具司法性和社会性的解纷机制。从ADR的角度看法院调解，法院调解与其他非诉解纷机制一样具有相同的制度补充机能，也完全可以主动用来将正义因素吸收进法治体系中，并增加法治中的自治因素。在宏观结构上对于法院调解制度所作的正当性论证，还有助于从微观层面上切实地设计出可行的具体操作规范，在合意性和效益性之外，强调其差异性，科学化和自治性，以改善以往实践中的不利因素。至此，我们就完成了对这样一个命题的论证：在现代社会法治文明进程中，多元有机的纠纷解决体系是根源于人类利益冲突的内在矛盾；表现于多种理论形态；呈现于以司法为中心，包含多种非诉解纷机制的庞大体系。由此我们不仅得到了对于法治文明的更深认识，还能够更理性地分析和指导作为法治重要一环的解纷实践。
英文文摘 When human beings try to survive and maintain interests, dispute occurs in different fields. Dispute is one of the normal living conditions. On the one hand it disrupts man''s living order, on the other hand it provides the driving force for social development. Thus, exploring the ways of settling dispute is one of the major themes of the development of human society. Law researches, in particular should not neglect this problem. Many fields are involved in dispute resolution research such as procedural law, anthropology of law, sociology of law economic analysis jurisprudence, comparative jurisprudence and culture of law. The practices of dispute resolution have already gone beyond the intra-judicial system reform and other kinds of dispute resolution systems have been developed. How should these phenomena be accounted for where are the practices going? Au these need judicial research so as to deepen our cognition of the legal society we are living in and to guide our practices. This paper tries to expound and prove the following propositions. In the process of legal civilization multiple theories result from the basic contradictions in dispute resolution, but when institution aspect is considered, only the multiple system of dispute resolution centered around jurisdiction works. In order to prove this proposition, the first part of the paper talks about the meaning of dispute, its relation with order, different types of dispute and its development and gets the general cognition of modern ways of dispute resolution. Based on the objective fact of the scarcity of resources during the interaction among subjects of society, contradiction occurs resulting from the pursuit and maintenance of interests, which leads to the unbalance or creation of social order. The act leading to the unbalance or creation of social order. The act leading to the unbalance or creation of social order is called dispute. On the one hand dispute disrupts the existing social order and on the other hand, it provides reasonable query about the existing order. Through dispute resolution either the existing order is created. Dispute resolution refers to the generalization of the place, institution procedure, regulations and process of preventing and resolving dispute. Dispute resolution develops from private aid to public aid in accordance with the different developmental stages of human society. Supernatural authority is a kind of dispute resolution attempting to discern and judge truth from falsity by supernatural power. Authority of man refers to the way that the man who settles dispute. Relies on his own authoritative resource such as force, knowledge, information or age rather than on the pure objective rules. Authority of law toke as the basis of dispute resolution law, like-law regulation and the nation and autonomous entity defined according to the regulation. Dispute resolution system in modern civilized society has undergone development from supernatural authority, system which centers around dispute resolution though litigation and includes non-litigation dispute resolution. In the aspect of civilization the dispute resolution system should be constructed around jurisdiction and under the premise of ruling by law; In the aspect of culture, the existing systems can get rebirth through creative transformation or complete the relegation of pattern based on creative transformation. First, this is caused by cognition of the limitation of rationality second it is caused by the transformation of judicial system''s function. Thirdly, it is caused by the defects of litigation which is part of dispute resolution system. Part Two gives further analysis of several pairs of basic contradictions in modern dispute resolution system and tries to reveal the internal factors that determine the multiple system of dispute resolution.
索书号 3010274
主题词 纠纷纠纷解决多元解纷机制
分类号 D90
论文答辩日期 20010410
论文页码总数 60P
论文页码总数 ref48,tab2
文献语种 zh
记录来源 吉林大学
记录流水号 DA200112005686

馆藏信息： 馆藏号 索书号
吉林大学 3010274