司法官與社會思想——基於《暴力行爲處罰法》等相關大審院最近的判决

Judicial Officers and Social Thought —Based on the recent judgments of relevant courts such as the Violent Acts Punishment Law

司法官缺乏社會意識，他們所謂的公正僅僅是通用於與他們處於相同階級、相同思想的人之間。法官在一方面有事實認定的自由，另一方面有法律解釋的自由。但是，該自由被法官的理想統治，法官通過裁判實現其理想。陪審員通過事實認定實現自己的理想。如果有陪審資格的人所從屬的階級與被告從屬的階級之間存在顯著的社會思想差异，裁判並不是因爲陪審的“民衆化”，反而是由於無法律和裁判素養的反對階級的民衆，通過他們的感情和階級意識，導致被告可能承擔極其不利的裁判結果。所以，在裁判過程中，我們應該注意“人”和其思想而不是法官或是陪審員本身。最後，本文列舉三個案例論證人們認爲最公正、最信賴的司法官也與他們處於相同的階級，相同思想的人站在一起。

Judicial officers lack social awareness, their so-called justice is only universal to those in the same class as them, between like-minded individuals. Judges have the freedom to determine facts on one hand，on the other hand, there is freedom of legal interpretation. However, this freedom is governed by the ideals of judges, judges achieve their ideals through adjudication. Jurors realize their ideals through factual determination. If there is a significant social ideological difference between the class to which the qualified juror belongs and the class to which the defendant belongs. The verdict is not due to the "democratization" of the jury, on the contrary, it is due to the lack of legal and judicial literacy of the opposing class of people, through their emotions and class consciousness, causing the defendant to bear extremely unfavorable judgment results. So, in the process of adjudication, we should pay attention to the "person" and their thoughts, rather than the judge or juror themselves. Finally, this article cites three cases to demonstrate that people believe that the most just and trustworthy judicial officials are also standing alongside people of the same class and ideology.