我国诉讼制度改革过程中不同程度地吸收和借鉴了直接言词原则的优良因素，但受国情的影响，直接言词原则在我国三大诉讼法中仍未全面确立。如何正确看待直接言词原则在我国法治建设中的价值以及如何在中国司法语境下实现它的价值，成为我国新的历史时期法治建设的重要命题。在我国引入直接言辞原则后的司法实践中，存在四种异化表现。针对异化问题，采用最优价值评估方法对直接言词原则的价值进行分析，指出其最优价值为个案公正价值，对直接言词原则制度内容分析，可明确直接言辞原则与我国诉讼实践的差距。应通过法律制度完善与司法努力两个路径来实现直接言词原则的最优价值。%In the process of litigation reform, it absorbs and learns from the excellent factors of the principle of direct language, but is influenced by national conditions, China ’s three major principles of direct language in procedural law have not fully established. An important proposition appears in the new historical period of building the rule of law in China .How to treat the value of direct verbal principles in the construction of rule and how to realize its value in the Chinese judicial context. Four alienation performances arise in the judicial practice in our country after introducing direct words. The following can be used to solve these problems of alienation, using the optimal method of evaluation to analyze the value of the principle of direct language, pointing out that the optimal value for the fair value of the case, combining with the analysis of the content of the principle of direct language system, and further clarifying the princi-ples and direct words of litigation gap. the paper shows that to perfect the administration and justice efforts may achieve best value of the principle of direct language through the legal system.
展开▼
