审前准备程序

审前准备程序，也称审理前的准备.民事审前准备程序结构的合理与否直接影响着民事审判的公正与效率。审前准备程序设置的目的是为了保证当事人从程序到实体都作好充分的准备，防止突然袭击，确保庭审活动的集中、顺畅进行，这是各国审前准备程序的共同性原则。美国民事诉讼是审前准备和审判活动两者并重，审前准备程序已日益成为民事诉讼中一个非常重要的阶段。但我国的民事审前准备程序长期以来被民事立法和司法所忽视，至今尚未有严格意义上的审前准备程序，审前准备程序作为民事诉讼程序的先期步骤，其设计适当与否关系着诉讼能在多大程度上实现司法公正，提高诉讼效益。美国《联邦民事诉讼规则》规定,审前程序由诉答程序、证据开示程序、审前会议构成。该规则已被大部分州所采用,美国民事诉讼审前程序体现为此三部分内容。在我国,依据《民事诉讼法》规定，审理前的准备程序主要包括如下活动：1、送达起诉状，通知被告提出答辩状并送达；2、告知当事人台议庭组成人员及诉讼权利，接受回避申请；3、全面了解案情，调查、收集证据井予以审查核实；4、追加当事人，同时，在调解原则指导下，调解活动也贯穿于准备程序中。总体比较起来。美国民事诉讼审前程序结构严谨脉络清晰，而我国审前程序结构较松散。两者之间的区别主要体现在以下几个方面：第一，关于送达主体。诉答程序中，送达主体是当事人而非法院，体现出民事诉讼为关涉私权的行动。法官消极地居于中立地位，避免单方接触当事人；在我国，送达主体是法院而非当事人，学理上对此解释为“送达”。第二，关于程序的发动。诉答程序是美国民事诉讼程序的第一阶段，而原告提交诉状又是诉答程序发动的肇始。因此，在美国民事诉讼中，一旦原告提出诉状就标志着诉讼程序的展开。然而，依照我国《民事诉讼法》规定，只有经法院对起诉状进行审查并受理立案后，才意味着民事诉讼程序的开始。第三，关于诉状的修改与追加当事人。诉答程序中，原告可在被告提出答辩状前、被告可在提出答辩状二十日内对各自的诉状予以修改、变更诉讼请求或追加被告等，超过此法定期限则只能在具有“重大理由”情况下并经法官许可才能修改。相反的，在我国民诉程序中，当事人对其诉讼请求的变更并不受诉讼阶段的限制，既可以在审前阶段也可在一审与二审程序对之加以修改。证据开示程序又称发现程序，是美国民事诉讼审前程序的重要组成部分.美国民事诉讼法上的证据开示程序活动主体是当事人及其律师，围绕着双方证据的开示而展开。。在我国，情况恰恰相反。审前证据活动主体基本上是法院，活动内容则是走访、询问当事人和证人，谓取资科等，当事人居于无为之地，只是在消极地等待法院开庭审理。显然．中国的法官在对其案件进行实质性审理前巳内在地形成了某种认识和判断。某种意义上讲，中国民事诉讼法上的审前准备程序名不副实，法官实际上在“准备”过程中就已经进行了实质上的审理。随着我国司法改革的逐步深入，审前准备程序改革已经迫在眉睫。对于其在适用过程中的缺陷与不足，只有完善以上几方面，才能有更好的突破。民事审前程序在现代民事诉讼中的地位越来越重。为了推进司法的现代化进程，保证民事诉讼的公正、公平和效率，我国必须对审前准备程序进行改革与完善<1>PretrialProcedure,alsoknownaspre-trialpreparation.CivilPretrialProcedurestructureisreasonableoradirectimpactonthefairnessandefficiencyoftheciviltrial.PretrialProceduresetpurposeistoensurethatthepartiestotheentityfromtheprogramarefullypreparedtopreventasurpriseattack,toensurethattheconcentrationofcourtproceedings,smoothly,whichisthenationalpre-trialpreparationprocedurescommonprinciples.U.S.civil

pre-trialpreparationandtrialactivityequalemphasis,pre-trialpreparationincivillitigationprocesshasincreasinglybecomeaveryimportantstage.However,China'scivilpre-trialpreparationprocedureshavelongbeenneglectedbycivillegislationandjudicial,therehasnotbeenstrictlyapre-trialpreparationprocedures,<2>Pre-trialpreparationproceduresasthefirststepsofcivilproceedings,whetherornotrelatedtoitsdesigntheappropriateactiontotheextenttowhichjustice,improvelitigationefficiency.UnitedStates'FederalRulesofCivilProcedure"providespre-trialproceedingsbythepleadingprocedures,discoveryindicatethattheprogram,pre-trialconfereneeform.Therulehasbeenadoptedbymoststates,theU.S.civilpre-trialproceduresreflectthisthree-partcontent.InChina,basedon"CivilLaw"stipulatesthatpre-trialpreparationproceduresincludethefollowingactivities:1,servedthecomplaint,defendantsfiledpleadingsandnoticeserved;2,informthepartiesoftheCourtiscomposedofunitsproposedandproceduralrights,accepttheapplicationforwithdrawal;3,acomprehensiveunderstandingofthecase,investigate,collectevideneewellbeexaminedandverified;4,additionalparties,whileundertheguidanceoftheprincipleofmediation,mediationactivitiesthroughoutthepreparationprocess.Overallcomparison.U.S.civilpre-trialproceduresstructuredcontextclear,andourpre-trialprogramstructuremoreloose.<3>Themaindifferencebetweenthetwoisreflectedinthefollowingareas:First,themainservice.VAprogram,serviceisthemainparties,notthecourts,reflectingthecivilactionisconcernedwithprivaterightsofaction.Judgepassivelylivinginaneutralposition,toavoidunilateralcontactwiththeparties;inChina,themainserviceofthecourtratherthantheparties,anacademicwiththeexplanationas"served."<4>Second,theprogram'slaunch.UnitedStatesv.Aprogramisthefirststageofcivilprocedure,theplaintiffsubmittedpetitionispleadingtheonsetoftheprogramlaunch.Thus,incivilproceedings,iftheplaintiffmadeanindictmentmarksthecommencementoftheproceedings.However,accordingtoChina's"CivilLaw"providesthatonlythecourttoreviewthecomplaintandacceptedforfilingbeforethestartofcivilproceduremeans.<5>Thirdly,onthecomplaintofthechangesandadditionalparties.VAprogram,theplaintiffinthepleadingsbeforethedefendant,thedefendantmaybemadewithintwentydaysofthepleadingsbeamendedtheircomplaint,changeoradditionaldefendantsclaimthatoverthestatutoryperiodisonlya"significantreason"caseandajudge'spermissiontomodify.Onthecontrary,inmynationalappealproceedings,thepartieschangetheirclaimsarenotsubjecttotherestrictionsstageoftheproceedings,eitherinpre-trialstagesinthefirstinstanceandsecondinstanceoftheprogramtobemodified.Discoveryindicatethattheprogram,alsoknownasthediscoveryprocess,civilpre-trialproceedingsintheUnitedStatesanimportantpartoftheU.S.CodeofCivilProcedureondiscoveryactivitiesindicatethattheprogramisthemain

partiesandtheirlawyers,theevideneesurroundingtheopeningofthetwosideswillstarttoshow..InChina,theoppositeistrue.Basically,themainactivitiesofpre-trialevideneetothecourt,thecontentistovisit,askthepartiesandwitnesses,thattheAccesstoInformationBranch,thepartieslivinginthelanddoingnothing,justpassivelywaitforthecourthearing.Obviously.China'sjudgesinhiscasebeforethesubstantivehearinghadformedakindofinnerknowledgeandjudgments.Inasense,China'scivillawunworthyofthenameofp