司法透明指数评估指标探讨

在中国全面深化司法公开改革背景下，司法公开广度和深度不断拓展，司法公开评估应运而生。司法透明指数吴兴实验、浙江法院阳光司法指数、河北法院阳光司法指数三个代表性指标体系既有共性，也有差异。当下司法透明指数评估的目标应定位于持续推进司法公开，督促法院保障公民获得公正裁判权与知情监督权；指标设计的前提在于明确司法公开的内容、性质、范围、对象和载体；还要适应评估实效性要求，调整评估维度，优化、完善具体指标设计。调整、优化后的司法透明指标体系具有普遍适用性和推广应用价值。

A Discussion on the Evaluation Index of Judicial Transparency Index

Judicial publicity has gone beyond the original implication of public hearing， under the background of China's all-round deepening reform of judicial publicity. Judicial information has been fully disclosed to improve public understanding， confidence and supervision of judiciary， with the effort of Chinese courts to establish an open， dynamic， transparent and convenient sunny judiciary. Judicial publicity evaluation has thus risen in response to the requirement to assess the performance of judicial publicity objectively， to fully reveal the achievement， shortage and problems of judicial publicity． The thesis makes a study on three cases, which are judicial transparency index Wuxing experiment, Zhejiang courts sunny judicial index and Hebei courts sunny judicial index, to analyze the generality and differences of the three index systems. The above three items of evaluation were all carried out by neutral third party, and emphases were all put on the assessment of judgments enforcement transparency. The three systems vary on their basis of index designs and index designs of non-case-related disclosure contents. This should not be commented simply， because to design different index systems according to different judicial policy background and evaluation objects， is exactly adaptable to the demand of judicial publicity evaluation effectiveness． As the first evaluation index applied to the judicial publicity practice, pilot experience of judicial transparency index evaluation should be summed up and the index system be revised comprehensively. At the present time, the goal of the judicial transparency index evaluation should be put to steer, spur and push forward the judicial publicity persistently, and to supervise and urge the courts to ensure the rights of impartial trial and information-based supervision. Emphasis of the evaluation should be put on the publicity of judicial information. The precondition of index designing is to define the content, nature, scope, objective and carriers. That is, to transfer from judgment enforcement publicity to judicial administration publicity gradually, to realize the full opening up of judicial process and judgment as a whole, to realize full scope of disclosure of judicial documents and reason of confidential documents, to disclose information differently and with priority to parties and to public, and to use traditional and modern carriers comprehensively. Judicial transparency evaluation system keeps two basic parts of public opinion survey index and dynamic monitoring index. Dynamic monitoring index includes two dimensions of judicial administration publicity and judgment enforcement publicity. The system consists of seven first-level indicators as combined plates: trial administration publicity, personnel administration publicity, financial administration publicity, trial process publicity, enforcement process publicity, judgment document publicity and supporting mechanism. It also establishes 42 second-level indicators through reservation, integration and establishing.