本篇論文目錄導航：
【題目】清末審判機構發展歷程探析
【序言 第一章】清末審判機構改革的背景及理念
【第二章】清末審判機構變革內容分析
【第三章】清末審判機構改革的評價及啟示
【結語/參考文獻】清末審判機構建設問題研究結語與參考文獻
中文摘要
本文研究的是清末審判機構改革及啟示，在中國古代的專制體制下，審判權和行政權是合一的，這種體制從秦代一直沿襲至清末。在封建中國，商品經濟不發達，因此這種體制在清末以前的適用并未出現較大的弊端，但是到了 16 世紀，商品經濟日益發達，糾紛變得復雜而龐多，原本負責審理案件的行政長官的司法經驗水平無法達到公正處理案件的程度，這種審判權與行政權合一的機構體制逐步顯露出弊端，清末審判機構改革改變了以往做法，并收到一定的效果，成為中國審判機構改革的開端，但這種改革后的司法體制并不是像西方那樣完全的司法獨立，而是一種仍在行政系統領導之下有中國特色的司法體系。中國古代當權者害怕劇烈的政治變革會帶來社會動蕩，往往采取溫和而緩慢的變革，這在一定程度上抑制了迫切的變革要求。因此，清末審判機構的改革也是一個漫長、微妙的過程。清末審判機構改革的原因包括：傳教士、留學生、留洋官員對西方審判文化的介紹；審判權與行政權合一的機構體制逐步顯露出弊端；領事裁判權的確立限制清政府的司法主權。清末審判機構改革內容包括設置司法行政管理機關、審判機關、檢察機關；以立法的形式賦予審判機構審判職能；實行四級三審制以劃分各審判機構的權限；設立專門司法培訓機構為各審判機構輸送人員。清末審判機構改革確立了司法與行政分立的司法機構體系。清政府在審判機構改革過程中將刑部改為法部，將大理寺改為大理院并且編制《大理院審判編制法》、《各級審判廳試辦章程》、《法院編制法》等法律。對清末審判機構的改革可以評價為這是一次形式意義上的改革，因為清末缺乏真正實現審判機構改革的經濟條件，同時清末缺乏真正實現審判機構改革的民主政治，而且清末缺乏與司法獨立審判制度相適應的合理的思想價值理念。但是同時清末審判機構改革建立了審判機構新舊并立的新型模式。清末的實踐為民國及以后進行審判機構改革和建立司法獨立制度提供給了有利基礎，也為當今中國司法改革改革提供了有益的借鑒。
關鍵詞：司法改革 審判機構 司法獨立
Abstract
This study is the late Qing trial institutional reform and enlightenment in the ancientChinese authoritarian regime, judicial and executive powers are one, this system hasbeen followed from the Qing Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty. In feudal China, commodityeconomy developed, so this system does not apply in the late former larger defects, butto the 16th century, increasingly developed commodity economy, the dispute hasbecome more complex and Pang, originally responsible for hearing cases ofadministrative Executive level judicial experience to the extent not fair handling of thecase, such a judicial and executive power of unity gradually reveal institutionalshortcomings late Qing trial institutional reform changed the past practice, and receive acertain effect, become the Chinese judicial institutions the beginning of reform, butreform of the judicial system of this post is not like the West completely independentjudiciary, but is still an administrative system under the leadership of the judicial systemwith Chinese characteristics. Ancient Chinese authorities fear violent political changewill bring social unrest, often take a moderate and slow change, which inhibits theurgent change requires a certain extent. Therefore, the reform of the judicial organ ofthe late Qing Dynasty is a long and delicate process. Late Qing Dynasty and the trialinstitutional reforms include: missionaries, students studying abroad officials tried tointroduce Western culture; judicial and executive power of institutional unity graduallyrevealing the shortcomings; the establishment of consular jurisdiction limit the Qinggovernment's judicial sovereignty. Late Qing trial institutional reforms including settingjudicial administrative organs, judicial organs; judicial functions conferred judicialinstitutions in the form of legislation; implementation of four three-trial system todivide permission Trial institutions; the establishment of specialized judicial traininginstitutions for the trial transportation agency staff. Late Qing trial institutional reformestablishes the separation of judicial and administrative judiciary system. The Qinggovernment in the process of institutional reform in the trial of Punishments to theMinistry of Justice, the supreme court and prepared to Daliyuan “Daliyuan trialpreparation Law”, “The Trial Chamber charter pilot at all levels”, “prepared by theCourt,” and other laws. Reform of the judicial organ of the late Qing Dynasty can beevaluated as it is a form of sense reform, because the lack of real trial late Qinginstitutional reform economic conditions, while the late Qing lack truly democratic political reform judicial institutions, and the late Qing Dynasty and independent justicesystem lacks justice rational thinking values compatible. But while the late QingDynasty tried to establish a new model of institutional reform judicial institutions of theold and new side by side. The late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of practice after thetrial institutional reform and the establishment of an independent judiciary systemprovided a favorable foundation for the reform of the judicial reform in China todayprovides a useful reference.
Key words: Reform of the Judicial System the Trial Institutions JudicialIndependence
目 錄
序 言
一、清末審判機構改革的背景及理念
（一）清末審判機構改革的背景
1.傳教士、留學生、留洋官員對西方審判文化的介紹
2.審判權與行政權合一的機構體制逐步顯露出弊端
3.領事裁判權的確立限制清政府的司法主權
（二）清末審判機構改革的理念1.會通中西
2.司法獨立
二、清末審判機構改革內容分析
（一）以立法的形式賦予審判機構審判職能
（二）嚴格劃分各審判機構職能
1.司法行政管理機構--法部、提法司
2.司法審判機構--大理院、審判廳
3.檢察機構--檢察廳
（三）實行四級三審制以劃分各審判機構的權限
（四）設立專門司法培訓機構為各審判機構輸送人員
三、清末審判機構改革的評價及啟示
（一）清末審判機構改革的評價
1.清末審判機構改革是形式意義上的司法獨立
2.清末審判機構改革建立了審判機構新舊并立的新型模式
（二）清末審判機構改革的啟示
1.實現審判機構改革應具有市場經濟條件
2.實現審判機構改革應具有民主政治條件
3.實現審判機構改革應具有權利本位的思想觀念條件
結 語
參考文獻
致 謝
【題目】清末審判機構發展歷程探析
【序言 第一章】清末審判機構改革的背景及理念
【第二章】清末審判機構變革內容分析
【第三章】清末審判機構改革的評價及啟示
【結語/參考文獻】清末審判機構建設問題研究結語與參考文獻
中文摘要
本文研究的是清末審判機構改革及啟示，在中國古代的專制體制下，審判權和行政權是合一的，這種體制從秦代一直沿襲至清末。在封建中國，商品經濟不發達，因此這種體制在清末以前的適用并未出現較大的弊端，但是到了 16 世紀，商品經濟日益發達，糾紛變得復雜而龐多，原本負責審理案件的行政長官的司法經驗水平無法達到公正處理案件的程度，這種審判權與行政權合一的機構體制逐步顯露出弊端，清末審判機構改革改變了以往做法，并收到一定的效果，成為中國審判機構改革的開端，但這種改革后的司法體制并不是像西方那樣完全的司法獨立，而是一種仍在行政系統領導之下有中國特色的司法體系。中國古代當權者害怕劇烈的政治變革會帶來社會動蕩，往往采取溫和而緩慢的變革，這在一定程度上抑制了迫切的變革要求。因此，清末審判機構的改革也是一個漫長、微妙的過程。清末審判機構改革的原因包括：傳教士、留學生、留洋官員對西方審判文化的介紹；審判權與行政權合一的機構體制逐步顯露出弊端；領事裁判權的確立限制清政府的司法主權。清末審判機構改革內容包括設置司法行政管理機關、審判機關、檢察機關；以立法的形式賦予審判機構審判職能；實行四級三審制以劃分各審判機構的權限；設立專門司法培訓機構為各審判機構輸送人員。清末審判機構改革確立了司法與行政分立的司法機構體系。清政府在審判機構改革過程中將刑部改為法部，將大理寺改為大理院并且編制《大理院審判編制法》、《各級審判廳試辦章程》、《法院編制法》等法律。對清末審判機構的改革可以評價為這是一次形式意義上的改革，因為清末缺乏真正實現審判機構改革的經濟條件，同時清末缺乏真正實現審判機構改革的民主政治，而且清末缺乏與司法獨立審判制度相適應的合理的思想價值理念。但是同時清末審判機構改革建立了審判機構新舊并立的新型模式。清末的實踐為民國及以后進行審判機構改革和建立司法獨立制度提供給了有利基礎，也為當今中國司法改革改革提供了有益的借鑒。
關鍵詞：司法改革 審判機構 司法獨立
Abstract
This study is the late Qing trial institutional reform and enlightenment in the ancientChinese authoritarian regime, judicial and executive powers are one, this system hasbeen followed from the Qing Dynasty to the Qing Dynasty. In feudal China, commodityeconomy developed, so this system does not apply in the late former larger defects, butto the 16th century, increasingly developed commodity economy, the dispute hasbecome more complex and Pang, originally responsible for hearing cases ofadministrative Executive level judicial experience to the extent not fair handling of thecase, such a judicial and executive power of unity gradually reveal institutionalshortcomings late Qing trial institutional reform changed the past practice, and receive acertain effect, become the Chinese judicial institutions the beginning of reform, butreform of the judicial system of this post is not like the West completely independentjudiciary, but is still an administrative system under the leadership of the judicial systemwith Chinese characteristics. Ancient Chinese authorities fear violent political changewill bring social unrest, often take a moderate and slow change, which inhibits theurgent change requires a certain extent. Therefore, the reform of the judicial organ ofthe late Qing Dynasty is a long and delicate process. Late Qing Dynasty and the trialinstitutional reforms include: missionaries, students studying abroad officials tried tointroduce Western culture; judicial and executive power of institutional unity graduallyrevealing the shortcomings; the establishment of consular jurisdiction limit the Qinggovernment's judicial sovereignty. Late Qing trial institutional reforms including settingjudicial administrative organs, judicial organs; judicial functions conferred judicialinstitutions in the form of legislation; implementation of four three-trial system todivide permission Trial institutions; the establishment of specialized judicial traininginstitutions for the trial transportation agency staff. Late Qing trial institutional reformestablishes the separation of judicial and administrative judiciary system. The Qinggovernment in the process of institutional reform in the trial of Punishments to theMinistry of Justice, the supreme court and prepared to Daliyuan “Daliyuan trialpreparation Law”, “The Trial Chamber charter pilot at all levels”, “prepared by theCourt,” and other laws. Reform of the judicial organ of the late Qing Dynasty can beevaluated as it is a form of sense reform, because the lack of real trial late Qinginstitutional reform economic conditions, while the late Qing lack truly democratic political reform judicial institutions, and the late Qing Dynasty and independent justicesystem lacks justice rational thinking values compatible. But while the late QingDynasty tried to establish a new model of institutional reform judicial institutions of theold and new side by side. The late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of practice after thetrial institutional reform and the establishment of an independent judiciary systemprovided a favorable foundation for the reform of the judicial reform in China todayprovides a useful reference.
Key words: Reform of the Judicial System the Trial Institutions JudicialIndependence
目 錄
序 言
一、清末審判機構改革的背景及理念
（一）清末審判機構改革的背景
1.傳教士、留學生、留洋官員對西方審判文化的介紹
2.審判權與行政權合一的機構體制逐步顯露出弊端
3.領事裁判權的確立限制清政府的司法主權
（二）清末審判機構改革的理念1.會通中西
2.司法獨立
二、清末審判機構改革內容分析
（一）以立法的形式賦予審判機構審判職能
（二）嚴格劃分各審判機構職能
1.司法行政管理機構--法部、提法司
2.司法審判機構--大理院、審判廳
3.檢察機構--檢察廳
（三）實行四級三審制以劃分各審判機構的權限
（四）設立專門司法培訓機構為各審判機構輸送人員
三、清末審判機構改革的評價及啟示
（一）清末審判機構改革的評價
1.清末審判機構改革是形式意義上的司法獨立
2.清末審判機構改革建立了審判機構新舊并立的新型模式
（二）清末審判機構改革的啟示
1.實現審判機構改革應具有市場經濟條件
2.實現審判機構改革應具有民主政治條件
3.實現審判機構改革應具有權利本位的思想觀念條件
結 語
參考文獻
致 謝
