| One of the basic values of our judicial system is the uniformity of the application of law,and it’s also the inevitable pursuit of judicial practice.At the present stage,due to various factors such as different location of cases,differences in the thinking of judges,the pressure of social attention and the nuances of similar cases,judges have deviations or even confrontations in referee results sometimes.This phenomenon of "different judgments of different types of cases" is not only contrary to the public’s reasonable prediction of the outcome of adjudication,but also conflicts with the pursuit of the contemporary judicial value system.At the same time,with the coming of information era and big data,people are able to browse thousands of judgment documents more quickly and conveniently than ever before,and their pursuit of consistency in referee results of similar cases and the call for formal and substantive justice have become higher and higher,which has raised the demand for a stricter standard to achieve justice in judicial field and individual cases.Therefore,the realization of"similar cases and similar referee results" has become an important goal in judicial practice.China is establishing and improving the Case Search Mechanism.In judicial practice,judges refer to cases for adjudication,which can reduce the probability of different judgments,ensure the stability of the law,promote judicial stability and enhance judicial credibility.Recent years,with the integration of big data analysis in the juridical spheres,the Case Search Mechanism is undergoing a process from pilot to promotion.Guidelines on the Unified Application of Law and Enhancement of the Case Search Mechanism,which came into force on July 31st,2020,raises the position of the Mechanism in judicial spheres to a new height.As one of the important measures to implement the Judicial Accountability System and unify the referee scale,the Mechanism is playing its value with the progress of the big data,at the same time,the upgrading of legal big data and artificial intelligence algorithms are also providing unprecedented development opportunities for the Mechanism itself.The author divides this thesis into five parts.The author uses the methods of literature analysis,comparative analysis and empirical survey to investigate the application of the Case Search Mechanism,taking the demand and application of judges as point of penetration.Then,The author explores the reasons and puts forward four suggestions based on the analysis of the causes of these problems,in order to make the Case Search Mechanism run better.The forward of the thesis introduces the background of the big data which promoting the construction and development of smart courts in judicial spheres,and introduces the significance of selecting the Case Search Mechanism as the research object.At the same time,it appraises the literature of the Case Search Mechanism at home and abroad.The first chapter analyzes the concept of similar cases,the Case Search Mechanism and its practical value.First,it introduces the concepts of similar cases,combining the definition of similar cases in the Guidelines with the definition by scholars in theory and practice.Second,it discusses the definition and operating features of Case Search Mechanism.Third,it points out that the Case Search Mechanism plays an important role to fill the gaps to the Statute Law,ease referee pressure of judges and guarantee the uniformity of judicial decisions’ scale under the background of big data in Judicial.The second chapter forms an understanding of the Case Search Mechanism’s operation basis on the institution and technical support.This part selects 15 judges and judge assistants from S Higher People’s court,S Intermediate People’s court and F Grassroots People’s court.In addition,the author participates in the search mechanism within the court,through judges’attitude towards the application of similar cases and search mechanism to investigate the current situation of the Case Search Mechanism in judicial trial.According to the research results,there are some problems like the unsatisfactory search results,the abhorrent citation of similar cases and the poor utilization of search system in the practice.Then,it explores the causes of these existing problems from the perspective of the inconsistent search platform,the imperfect search technology,the difficulties in thinking-transformation and the lack of policy provisions and supervision mechanism.The third chapter analyzes the Precedent System in Anglo-American Law System,the Case Application System in Civil Law System and the case reference in Chinese Legal System with the method of comparative analysis.To improve the Case Search System with Chinese characteristics,we should not only absorb the essence of traditional legal culture,but also learn from the outstanding practice abroad,like the action of parties,the distinguishing technology,the guiding words and so on.The forth chapter puts forward four suggestions based on the causes of these problems,In the judicial practice,we should unify the search platform and operation specifications,improve searching technology and refine case keywords,cultivate the thought of Big Data and establish the mechanism of supervision and incentive,in order to perfect the Case Search Mechanism and ensure the goal of the Judicial Accountability System. |
