论文部分内容阅读
在司法协同主义和权利保障观念勃兴的背景下,公证人告知义务和法官释明义务比较研究的价值日趋凸显。笔者以两者特征之异同为切入点,围绕角色定位、表现形式、适用阶段、履行方式、理论基础、履行对象、义务范围、履行标准等方面问题展开探讨。最终,本文力图通过指正两者实然上的不足,构思制度的应然建设,并对两者进行价值前瞻,以期两者在比较中互补借鉴,扬长避短,发挥确认和重构社会行为准则的价值。
In the context of the rise of the concept of judicial synergy and protection of rights, the notary public has become increasingly prominent in the comparative research on the obligation of informing a judge and on the obligation of interpretation by judges. The author takes the similarities and differences between the two as the starting point and probes into the issues such as the role orientation, the manifestations, the applicable stages, the ways of implementation, the theoretical basis, the object of fulfillment, the scope of obligation, and the performance standards. In the end, this paper attempts to correct the actual situation of the two systems by conceptualizing the proper construction of the system and looking forward to the value of the two systems, so as to complement each other for reference in the comparison and avoid weaknesses and give full play to the value of identifying and reconstructing the social code of conduct .