Research On The Function Orientation Of Court In The Governance Of Source Of Action

The research on the functional positioning of the people’s courts in the source of litigation governance is conducive to further improving and developing the source of litigation governance system,deepening the diversified dispute governance mechanism,and promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity.Through the literature analysis,it can be concluded that the academic circle has different opinions on the functional positioning of the court in the governance of the source of litigation.Some viewpoints advocate that the court should participate in the work of the source of litigation and assume the role of the mainstay,and should inspect the source of litigation and actively search for conflicts and disputes.Some people think that the court as a judicial organ,neutrality and passivity are its judicial characteristics,so the court should participate in the governance of the source of litigation as an assistant.Through the method of case analysis,it is concluded that the types of cases in which the court participates in the governance of the source of litigation can be summarized as: court leading cases,court assisting cases,and other forms of cases.From the perspective of comparative law,it is found that there are some problems in the court’s participation in the governance of sources of litigation,such as unclear court function positioning,excessive reliance on litigation mechanism in the current governance of sources of litigation,the court’s case registration system being suspended,the court’s neutrality being destroyed,and the court’s pursuit of formal case closing rate in order to achieve performance assessment standards.To solve the above problems,the author puts forward the following suggestions: first,to construct the litigation source governance system centering on non-litigation institutions;The second is to adhere to the principle of respecting the will of the parties for the disputes entering the filing stage;The third is to adhere to the neutrality of the court;Fourth,redefine the performance appraisal system of the court;The fifth is to clarify the positioning of the court in the governance of the source of action.