摘要
诉讼程序中陪审团指示用语违背语用学合作原则,可能引起法律上的各种相应后果。分析我国香港陪审团制度中的大量案例,结果表明并不是所有的歧义、指示矛盾或者其他指示缺陷都会必然导致合法程序的违背,但违背合作原则显然是当事人上诉以及上级法院搁置或撤销下级法院原判的重要依据之一。因此,建议以合作原则作为分析陪审团指示是否违背合法程序的主要指导原则,对于我国刚纳入诉讼法律程序不久的法官释明权的发展与完善也有一定的借鉴作用。
Violation of Cooperative Principles in pragmatics in jury instructions could bring about various cor- responding legal consequences in legal procedures. By carrying out a case-based study in Hong Kong, it reveals that not every ambiguity, contradiction or deficiency in jury instruction will necessarily lead to the violation of legal procedures, but the violation of Cooperative Principles in pragmatics is obviously one of the crucial rationales for the litigant＇ s appeal and the appellate court ＇ s suspension or quashing of the original decision rendered by the lower court. The paper, therefore, suggests that Cooperative Principles should be the guidance to analyze whether the le- gal procedures are violated or not in jury instructions, which may also have the referential significance for the per- fection of judge＇ s aufldanmgsrecht just integrated in the legal proceeding in China's Mainland.
出处
《浙江师范大学学报（社会科学版）》
北大核心
2012年第2期110-115,共6页
Journal of Zhejiang Normal University(Social Sciences)
基金
浙江省钱江人才计划项目"基于现代网络和数字多媒体技术的‘多边互动’外语自主学习平台研究开发"(2011R10056)
关键词
陪审团指示
程序适当性
语用分析
合作原则
法官释明权
jury instruction
procedural appropriateness
pragmatic analysis
Cooperative Principles
aufklarungsrecht
