| 摘要: | 古希臘時期，因其政體屬於城邦政治故，是以具有公民身分者所佔比例不高，政治之民主化較易實現，其中雅典即是典型的城邦，這種政治上的民主，亦反映在審判之上，可謂是最早的陪審制度，其中最典範的案例，即是對蘇格拉底之審判案件。
陪審制是可以藉由人民的參與，去制衡國家的司法審判權，在制度的設計上，只要陪審團宣判一個案件無罪，除非找到新的證據，否則國家就不能再追訴，檢察官亦不能再提起上訴，但如果是判決有罪，被告則可以再上訴。
參審制於歐陸各國人民參與審判的主要途徑，參審法庭通常由一位職業法官與二位參審員組成，參審員與職業法官就認定事實與適用法律的職權完全相同，此點與陪審制有別。
司法的公正性一直以來是我國人民關注的重點，而今年施行的國民法官制度更是堪稱司法史上最重大的變革之一，我國的「國民法官制度」採用類似德國與日本的「參審制」，不過，當初在政策討論的階段，也有很多人認為應該選擇英美的「陪審制」這兩者，最大的差別在於陪審制是由全素人所組成來做判決，而「參審制」則是由素人加上「職業法官」一起審理案件。
如果司法為人民，就沒有困難將司法運作和現行的實際操作程序傳承下去，讓人民群眾了解司法運作和現行的實際運作程序，從而使司法成為值得信賴、穩定的司法機關，是國家進步和社會發展的中流砥柱。
In the ancient Greek period, because its political system belonged to the city-state politics, the proportion of people with citizenship was not high, and the democratization of politics was easier to achieve, among which Athens was a typical city-state, and this political democracy was also reflected in the trial, which can be said to be the earliest jury system, and the most exemplary case was the trial of Socrates.
The jury system can be used to check the judicial power of the state through the participation of the people, and in the design of the system, as long as the jury acquits a case, unless new evidence is found, the state can no longer prosecute, and the prosecutor can no longer appeal, but if the verdict is guilty, the defendant can appeal again.
The trial participation system is the main way for people from European and Chinese countries to participate in trials, and the trial court is usually composed of a professional judge and two participants, and the participants and professional judges have exactly the same authority to determine facts and apply the law, which is different from the jury system.
The fairness of the judiciary has always been the focus of our people's attention, and the national judge system implemented this year is one of the most significant changes in judicial history, China's "national judge system" adopts a similar "trial system" to Germany and Japan, but at the stage of policy discussion, many people think that the British and American "jury system" should be chosen, the biggest difference between the two is that the jury system is composed of all vegetarians to make judgments. In the trial system, amateurs and professional judges hear cases together.
If the judiciary is for the people, there will be no difficulty in passing on the judicial operation and the current actual operating procedures, so that the people can understand the judicial operation and the current actual operating procedures, so that the judiciary will become a trustworthy and stable judicial organ. It is the mainstay of country progress and social development. |
