Justice and efficiency are the value goals pursued by judicial reform, and also the eternal theme of the trial work of people's courts in the 2 1 century. Ensuring judicial justice and improving judicial efficiency are the starting point and destination of the work of the people's courts in the new century and the soul and life of judicial work. The Supreme Court clearly regards justice and efficiency as the two major themes of the court's work, which is the inevitable result of profound reflection on the court's past work and an accurate positioning of the value and goal of the court's work in the new century. This is not only a basic requirement for national courts and their staff, but also a solemn commitment to the broad masses of the people and the international community. We should deeply understand the great practical significance and far-reaching historical significance of this proposition, fully understand the importance and necessity of justice and efficiency, and enhance the sense of urgency and consciousness of realizing judicial justice and improving judicial efficiency. As a people's judge in the new century, it should be the noblest and most glorious duty to pursue judicial justice and efficiency unremittingly. At the 2007 National Political and Legal Work Conference and the National Symposium for Judges and Prosecutors, General Secretary Hu Jintao emphasized: "We should enhance the awareness of political and legal police officers to safeguard social fairness and justice, strictly regulate political and legal behavior, correctly handle the important relationship between fairness and efficiency, and enthusiastically safeguard people's rights and interests." How to realize judicial justice and efficiency is not only the focus of people's courts at all levels, but also the problem that every judge should consider. Below, the author talks about some superficial understanding on the contradictory factors affecting judicial justice and efficiency and the relevant countermeasures to realize judicial justice and efficiency.

First, the factors affecting fairness and efficiency

At present, there are many factors that affect and restrict the judicial justice and efficiency of the people's courts, some of which come from the external environment of the courts, and the law enforcement environment faced by the courts is still not satisfactory. Judges are disturbed from time to time in the process of handling cases, and some interference exists in the court itself. The reform of trial mode and trial mechanism is not perfect, and the overall quality of judges is not high, which is manifested in the following aspects:

(A) the party and government organs and local protectionism interfere with the independent trial of the court

Due to the influence of the rule of man system formed on the basis of planned economy, the constitutional status of the court has not been truly implemented, and the legal status and role of the court have not been correctly understood by the leaders of the party and government organs. In addition, the people, property and things of the courts are controlled and managed by the local party committees and governments, and the higher courts only provide operational guidance and supervision to the lower courts. Because people, money and things are under local control, there will inevitably be the problem of "holding people's bowls and managing affairs", and it is difficult for people's courts to put aside local interests in judicial activities, leading to the localization of judicial power. Some party and government organs have weak awareness of the rule of law, privileged thoughts and paternalistic style, regard the court as a subordinate department and ask the court to do everything possible to safeguard the interests of local parties. When the court's practice is not what it wants, it will make things difficult, replace the law with words, and suppress the law with power to interfere in the trial of the case. In some places, party and government leaders even publicly threatened not to distribute wages, forcing the courts to make judgments and decisions that violate the law. In this case, it is difficult for the people's court to try independently, which affects judicial justice and efficiency.

(B) Complex social networks interfere with the trial.

Social networks interfere with the justice and efficiency of the court. In recent years, it has become an open secret to go to court to find a relationship. Some people even say that "going to court is to make a relationship". Whether the parties are reasonable or unreasonable, they always look for acquaintances, especially the unreasonable party, and try their best to exert influence and pressure on the judge by using various complicated and subtle interpersonal relationships. Some judges who are weak-willed, indifferent to self-discipline, unable to resist the temptation and do not stress the principle of handling cases will inevitably not handle relationship cases and human cases, which will affect the judicial justice and efficiency of the court.

(C) Civil cases complicated and simplified diversion mechanism is not perfect

The long litigation period is an important reason that directly affects the litigation cost and efficiency. In the trial practice, the use of summary procedure and ordinary procedure is very arbitrary. Whether to use summary procedure or ordinary procedure is basically decided by the judge who is responsible for arranging the trial, which leads to the use of ordinary procedure in many cases that should be tried by summary procedure. There are also some judges who are afraid of taking responsibility independently and exceeding the trial limit. As long as the case is a little difficult, they would rather go through the ordinary procedure than give up the summary procedure. There are also some judges who try their best to turn into ordinary procedures in order not to exceed the trial time limit when they can't close the case within three months, which leads to some cases that should be tried by summary procedure, and the trial time limit is artificially extended, and the legitimate rights and interests of the parties are not protected in time and effectively. This not only increases the workload of judges, wastes a lot of manpower, material resources and financial resources, but also brings greater litigation burden to the parties.

The proceedings are too cumbersome.

The litigation procedure intuitively restricts the litigation activities of the parties, and the complexity of the litigation procedure determines the number of litigation actions carried out by the parties. In specific civil cases, under the specific circumstances of disputed matters, complicated litigation procedures require the parties to take more litigation actions, thus increasing litigation costs. Summary proceedings limit the subject's behavior to the minimum required to achieve the purpose of litigation, thus reducing the litigation investment. Because the current civil procedure law of our country is too principled and the scope of application is too narrow, it shows great limitations in the trial, which makes a large number of civil cases apply ordinary procedures, even those cases that apply summary procedures fail to highlight the word "Jane". Most judges are still used to operating in accordance with the provisions of ordinary procedures when applying summary procedures to hear cases, and they cannot be fast, fast and fast, which fails to reflect the unique advantages of simple, easy and efficient summary procedures. All kinds of tedious and unnecessary links and steps make the judge feel tired and the parties feel tired of litigation. It leads to the waste of judicial resources, the increase of litigation cost and the decrease of litigation efficiency.

(5) The litigant's litigation ability is low.

In recent years, with the deepening of the reform of trial mode, the position and mode of people's courts in trial work have changed. Especially with the introduction of judicial interpretation of relevant evidence rules, the function of people's courts to actively intervene in evidence collection is gradually weakened, while the requirements for litigant's litigation ability are constantly improving. Correspondingly, the update of the legal awareness of the parties is relatively lagging behind, and a large number of parties still believe that the case will go into the safe when it arrives at the court, and the court will be responsible for it in the future. The backward concept is difficult to adapt to the requirements of judicial reform, which is manifested in the lack of litigation risk awareness, poor awareness of evidence preservation and weak ability to provide evidence, which leads to the situation that the parties generally think it is difficult to obtain evidence, provide evidence and file a lawsuit. After the trial of the case, coupled with the judge's carelessness in answering questions after the judgment and the lack of in-depth legal interpretation, the parties questioned the judicial justice. The parties can't accept the judgment, and many people choose to appeal or appeal. In the hopeless case of litigation, I chose a relatively simple way to petition. In the trial practice, some parties abused their rights, put forward new evidence at any time to delay the proceedings, some deliberately failed to provide evidence in the first instance in time, which led to the revision of the judgment in the second instance, or the failure to provide evidence in the second instance led to retrial. The cycle allows the parties to go back and forth between several levels of courts. It increases the litigation burden of the parties and consumes a lot of manpower, material resources, time and energy of the court. This reduces the efficiency of the trial.

Second, to achieve fairness and efficiency, we should focus on the following aspects.

(A) ideologically firmly establish the concept of justice and efficiency.

Maintaining judicial justice is the sacred duty of every judge, which is reflected in every case tried by every judge, in every judgment and in every litigation activity. The people's courts are required to always put the trial work in the overall situation of the party and the state, and provide reliable judicial guarantee and high-quality legal services for reform, development and stability. Therefore, we must further enhance the overall awareness, give full play to the role of various trial functions, strive to improve judicial efficiency, and pursue the organic unity of legal and social effects of trial work on the premise of ensuring fair judgment. Every judge should have a clear understanding of this and firmly establish a sense of justice and efficiency. We should always put political qualification in the first place, clarify the political direction, enhance political discernment and acumen, keep in mind the service purpose, establish a correct world outlook, outlook on life and values, and always maintain a high degree of consistency with the CPC Central Committee. We should arm our minds with Deng Xiaoping Theory and Theory of Three Represents, ensure political sobriety and firmness, and make the trial work serve and obey the overall situation of the whole party and country. Every judge should faithfully perform the duties entrusted by the Constitution and laws, ensure judicial justice, and serve the reform, development and stability. With the basic requirements of "telling the truth, doing practical things and being honest" and "loving the party, the country, the hospital and the post", we should draw a clear line between right and wrong ideologically and enhance our immunity to bourgeois decadent ideas. [4] We should take advanced models such as Song Yushui and Jiang Qing as examples, be willing to contribute to the cause, regardless of utility for the people, do practical things for the people, do good things, and solve problems for the people.

(b) Efforts must be made to improve the professional quality of judges.

The professional quality of judges directly affects judicial justice and litigation efficiency. Especially with the rapid development of market economy, judicial work is facing more and more new situations and new types of cases, and it is difficult for a judge with low professional quality to adapt, let alone reflect judicial justice and efficiency. Therefore, every judge should be familiar with and master the laws, regulations and relevant judicial interpretations formulated and promulgated by the state, as well as the knowledge closely related to trial work such as socialist market economy and modern science and technology, and seriously study the new situations and problems that appear in trial practice. To improve professional quality, we should start from the following aspects: First, actively participate in education and training. Education and training should have systematic planning, complete learning content and clear requirements. Through training, you can quickly improve your business skills, at the same time strengthen communication and gain more information and experience, so as to learn from each other. Second, you can improve your professional quality through continuous self-study. Newly promulgated laws and regulations and the latest judicial interpretation must be understood and understood through self-study and skillfully used in trial practice. For some commonly used important laws, through self-study, we can review the old and learn new things. In the trial practice, when encountering new situations and problems, we also need to learn relevant knowledge through self-study. Third, consciously and selectively participating in the trial observation is also conducive to improving the professional level. As observers, judges can not only learn from each other about trial skills and the application of laws, but also sum up experience, find shortcomings, put forward perfect methods and improve their trial ability. The fourth is to establish a trial performance evaluation system for the purpose of fairness and efficiency. Establishing an evaluation system of trial quality and efficiency in accordance with the law of trial, comprehensively, objectively and fairly reflecting the situation of trial quality and efficiency, and giving play to the guiding, encouraging and restraining role of the index system for judges are in line with the work goal and value orientation that the trial work must pursue fairness and efficiency. By selecting some indicators that can reflect the characteristics and laws of trial work, we can grasp and evaluate the quality, efficiency and effect of trial from different aspects and angles as a whole, and provide more objective data for the establishment of judge's trial performance evaluation, which can be comprehensively evaluated by post target management and judge evaluation management. Judge's trial performance evaluation is regarded as the standard of inspection and supervision of trial work and the basic measure of evaluation and examination of judges, so as to play its supervisory role and promote the improvement of case quality and efficiency. [5] In short, a judge should not only have the virtue of being able to "listen with an open mind, answer wisely, think carefully and judge fairly", but also have the judicial concept of acting quickly, observing the limitation of action and pursuing high efficiency. Only by acting quickly can judges complete all judicial duties in time and efficiently, and realize judicial justice to a greater extent.

(3) Actively promote the reform of trial methods.

At present, China's socialist construction is not only in the period of important strategic opportunities, but also in the period of prominent contradictions among the people. The conflicts of interest among various social subjects are increasing day by day, and the types and number of cases are increasing rapidly every year. At the same time, the people's awareness and demand for safeguarding their legitimate rights and interests through judicial procedures are constantly increasing, which puts forward higher requirements for the court's law enforcement ability and level. Therefore, it is an important task for courts and judges to improve the efficiency of handling cases and realize the requirements of handling cases quickly, efficiently and with high quality. We should focus on the reform of trial methods, minimize the repetitive and tedious links in litigation, minimize the repeated and invalid work of judges, and run the best quality cases in the shortest time. The ultimate goal of the reform of trial mode is to realize judicial justice and efficiency. In the way of trial, we should focus on all aspects of trial and explore the best scientific way of trial. In the reform, we must insist that two things cannot be changed: the system and principles stipulated by law cannot be changed, and the procedural rules of court sessions cannot be changed. We should focus on three weakening phenomena in the past: the weakening of the burden of proof of the parties, the weakening of the court's trial function and the weakening of the trial mechanism, which led to low efficiency and poor effect in handling cases. In the trial, we should vigorously carry out three enhancements: First, strengthen the burden of proof of the parties and improve the system of proof. It is the first step to improve the trial function in the reform of trial mode to establish the proof system of "the parties give priority to the proof, supplemented by court verification". In view of the limitations of the parties' awareness and ability to give evidence, it is necessary to clearly inform the parties of various cases of the main points of giving evidence and the scope of court investigation and evidence collection, and guide the parties to give evidence according to law. The second is to strengthen the function of trial, and implement one-step trial and plea trial. The implementation of "one-time appearance in court" is a case that is tried by summary procedure. The presiding judge may directly summon the parties to hold a hearing, mediate in court and pronounce a sentence in court. For cases that apply ordinary procedures, the collegial panel conducts necessary examination of the evidence provided by the parties, prepares the trial outline and then opens the court directly, and completes the work of giving evidence, cross-examination and authentication in the trial. If the court session can confirm the facts and distinguish right from wrong, mediation or judgment can be made in court; If the facts and evidence cannot be confirmed, the parties may be notified to supplement the evidence and reopen the court session. The judge is the leader of the trial, but also highlights the main position of the parties in the lawsuit. The judge guides the parties to make statements, give evidence, cross-examine and debate during the trial, and ensures them to fully exercise their litigation rights. The duties of a judge in a trial are mainly two tasks: "trial" and "judgment", examining and confirming facts and evidence, and judging the right and wrong responsibilities of the parties. In this way, under the auspices of the judge, the litigants face to face, have something to say in court, have arguments in court, have evidence in court, distinguish right from wrong in court, explain the legal truth in court, and make mediation and judgment public in court. The judge presided over the trial and made the verdict public, which made the winning party very happy. The loser had nothing to say, and the audience nodded yes. Moreover, making the trial process fully open will not only help to handle cases fairly and improve the efficiency of litigation, but also achieve the effect of publicizing national laws, enhance citizens' trust and confidence in the national legal system, and let ordinary people know, believe, respect and abide by the law on the premise of voluntary consciousness. [6] The third is to strengthen the functions of the collegiate bench and the sole court. The judicial committee shall delegate power to the collegiate bench and the sole court, improve the sense of responsibility of the sole court and the collegiate bench, and strengthen their functions. At the same time, it is necessary to strictly implement the accountability system for misjudged cases, and whoever handles misjudged cases will be responsible. In the aspect of execution, we should separate the trial from the execution and straighten out the execution mechanism. The quality of execution affects the effect of the whole trial. Therefore, we must correct the tendency of emphasizing trial over execution, establish the idea of paying equal attention to execution and trial, and establish a working mechanism in which trial and execution are independent and cooperate with each other. It is necessary to improve the implementation method, adhere to fair, open and civilized law enforcement, and achieve "three combinations", that is, the combination of centralized implementation and routine implementation, and the combination of collective implementation and individual implementation; Combination of coercion and persuasion education. In execution, the purpose is to fulfill the obligations of the person subjected to execution, make full use of the compulsory measures given by law, and urge the person subjected to execution to fulfill the effective judgment. By actively carrying out the reform of trial mode, the case can be filed, tried and executed quickly, and finally judicial justice and efficiency can be realized.

(D) expand the scope of application of summary procedure

Work hard on "Jane", make a fuss about "Yi", and [7] seek practical results on "Fast". It is necessary to establish the judicial concept of "quick adjudication", further improve the "quick adjudication" mechanism, effectively apply the provisions of the procedural law on summary procedure according to law, and apply the "quick adjudication" mechanism to cases with clear evidence, single request, little controversy and clear relationship between rights and obligations. The application of "quick ruling" simplifies the trial procedure to the maximum extent, facilitates the parties to go to court, and solves the disputes between the parties in the simplest way, in the shortest time and at the lowest cost. Correct application of the Supreme People's Court in order to better reflect the unique advantages of simple, easy, efficient and fast summary procedure. The following aspects should be considered in trial practice: 1. Adhering to the principle of voluntary disposition of litigation right and respecting the agreement of the parties can shorten the cycle of case circulation. Procedural justice is the guarantee of substantive justice, but procedural simplification does not necessarily mean judicial injustice. For those litigation rights that can be disposed of by the parties themselves, the parties' right to dispose should be respected, and the court does not have to intervene. If the parties appear in court at the same time to ask for a settlement of the dispute, they may hold a court hearing immediately; When the complaint is served, the parties shall be asked whether they advocate the defense period. If the parties give up the defense period or agree to request a quick ruling, they can directly serve the summons for opening the court session and advance the time of opening the court session to the defense period, which is not limited by the defense period. If the parties insist on the defense period of 15 days, they can serve two summonses at a time, one is the investigation summons during the defense period, which is used for pre-trial evidence exchange, factual statement and pre-trial mediation; One is the court summons after the expiration of the defense period. 2. Improve the success rate of pre-trial mediation. While expanding the scope of application of summary procedure, pre-trial mediation is carried out, that is, according to the principle of voluntariness and legality, when the notice of acceptance and a copy of the complaint are served, the parties are asked whether they agree to mediation. A case that agrees to mediation shall be presided over by a mediation judge who specializes in speedy adjudication. When mediating, you can flexibly grasp the time and place according to the requirements of the parties. The parties can be guided to reconcile themselves, and the judge can also put forward mediation suggestions and opinions in time to urge the parties to reach a mediation agreement, so as to alleviate social contradictions and improve trial efficiency and social effects. 3. Simplify the trial procedure. First, when filing a case and serving a copy of the complaint, the formatted Notice of Litigation Rights and Obligations will be served to the parties, which not only allows the parties to fully understand their due rights and obligations, but also reduces the time taken to guide the litigation in court. Second, in the court investigation, the undisputed facts of the original and the defendant will not be investigated; There is no proof or cross-examination of the mutually recognized facts. Third, in the court debate, the original defendant and the defendant did not debate on the application of the law, and directly entered the court for mediation or judgment. Fourth, in the court record, the disputed facts of both parties and the opinions of the parties are mainly recorded, such as admission, admission, reconciliation, abandonment, etc., and others are simple. Fifth, court investigation and court debate are conducted alternately or simultaneously, and are not subject to the procedural restrictions stipulated in Articles 124 and 127 of the Civil Procedure Law. 4. Simplify the production of written judgments and conciliation statements, and improve the delivery rate in court. Judging from the trial practice, the vast majority of cases tried by summary procedure are pronounced in court, which greatly improves the efficiency. However, because the losing party has been informed of the unfavorable judgment results in the trial, there are not a few cases of refusing to receive or reject the judgment documents within the statutory time limit. Repeated notice service has brought a lot of ineffective labor, resulting in a waste of human and material resources of the court. Therefore, it is necessary to request the court to serve the judgment document. However, in order to print and serve judgment documents in court, it is necessary to simplify the production format of judgment documents, omit the defense opinions and legal analysis of the original and defendant, focus on the facts and judgment results confirmed by the court, formulate formatted judgments, conciliation statements and rulings according to the characteristics of different types of cases, and fill in the corresponding contents according to different situations when using them, saving the time of the court and the parties. If the judgment needs to be received regularly due to special circumstances, the parties concerned shall be informed. If the judgment is not received within the time limit, it shall be deemed as served, and the starting and ending time of the appeal period shall be indicated.

(5) Pay attention to the mediation function and improve the litigation mediation system.

A jurist once said: Mediation is a more advanced and artistic trial. In the trial practice, every judge should establish the trial concept of mediating litigation and ensuring social harmony and stability, and give full play to the leading role of mediation in building a harmonious society. It is necessary to follow the principle of "adjust the mediation if you can, judge if you can, combine mediation and judgment, and settle the case through reconciliation", pay attention to mediation skills, improve the art of mediation, adopt various flexible ways according to different cases, make mediation run through the whole process of litigation, promote mutual understanding and accommodation between the parties, ensure the harmony and stability of civil relations, and pursue the legal effect of "settling the case through reconciliation". Mediation requires patient, meticulous and even repeated ideological work, and mediation cases generally do not cause complaints, appeals, retrial or complaint letters and visits. Mediation is the most effective way of trial, which is not only conducive to preventing the intensification of contradictions, enhancing the harmony of the parties, eliminating confrontational emotions, but also saving litigation costs and facilitating execution. Pay attention to the mediation function, improve the litigation mediation system, incorporate the mediation rate into the target assessment, encourage and guide judges to mediate cases to the maximum extent, and make mediation a legal booster for building a harmonious society. At the same time, the people's courts should give full play to their civil trial functions, strengthen contact with judicial offices, people's mediation organizations and grass-roots party organizations under their jurisdiction, strengthen regular legal professional training and guidance, pay attention to preventing and reducing the occurrence of contradictions and disputes from the source, actively build a "big mediation" pattern of social contradictions and disputes linked by people's mediation, administrative mediation and judicial mediation, and timely resolve contradictions at the grass-roots level and solve them in the bud. Promote social harmony and stability.

(6) Improve the system and strengthen supervision.

To achieve judicial justice and efficiency, we must also improve various systems and strengthen internal and external supervision. Judges hold sacred judicial power, but the loss of supervision of power will inevitably lead to corruption. Justice should not only be realized, but also be realized in a way that people can see. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the internal supervision mechanism and fully open the external supervision channels. But the main thing is to establish and improve strict internal control system and code of conduct, and self-improve the internal supervision mechanism. It is necessary to strengthen the system construction, standardize the filing, trial and execution according to the principle of openness and fairness, and ensure the openness and fairness of litigation activities. It is also necessary to establish and improve a self-restraint mechanism that separates trial, trial execution and trial supervision, strengthen the restriction on judicial power, and ensure the fairness of judges and the integrity and self-discipline of judges. At the same time, it is necessary to strictly regulate the relationship between judges and the parties and lawyers, prohibit accepting invitations from the parties and their agents, prohibit charging fees and soliciting sponsorship from the parties, prohibit meeting the parties and their agents and defenders privately or alone, and prohibit introducing lawyers to the parties and cases to lawyers.

In terms of external supervision, the court should focus on the following tasks: First, it should establish and improve the system of actively accepting the leadership of the Party Committee and the supervision of the National People's Congress. Actively invite NPC deputies and CPPCC members to participate in the inspection and evaluation of the work of the court and attend the trial of cases. Criticism of NPC deputies and CPPCC members should be seriously and responsibly investigated and dealt with, and feedback should be given to NPC deputies and CPPCC members in time, and we must never be perfunctory. The leadership of the Party Committee, the supervision of the National People's Congress and the opinions of CPPCC members are important guarantees to realize judicial justice and efficiency. Second, take the initiative to open the door to counseling, and solicit opinions and suggestions from the party committees and employees in the jurisdiction on the work of the court through seminars, case visits, questionnaires and other forms. Establish a special complaint telephone number and complaint box for judges who violate the law and discipline, issue integrity supervision cards to both parties when filing a case, and consciously accept the supervision of the parties during the whole process of hearing the case. The third is to consciously accept the supervision of public opinion. It is necessary to implement the open trial system stipulated by the Constitution and laws. Except for cases involving state secrets, citizens' personal privacy and juvenile delinquency, all cases shall be tried in public, and "black-box operation" is not allowed. In public trials, in addition to allowing citizens to attend freely, the trial activities can also be broadcast live on television and radio, allowing news organizations to report truthfully in a responsible attitude towards the law. Live broadcast can increase transparency, make trial activities under the direct supervision of the public and news media, and help judges to act in strict accordance with the law, be honest and self-disciplined.

Judicial justice and efficiency is a systematic project. In addition to the court's own efforts, it also needs the understanding and support of all sectors of society. To achieve justice and efficiency, a good external law enforcement environment is an important guarantee. Vigorously enhance the concept of the rule of law of the whole people, improve citizens' consciousness and enthusiasm in learning, obeying, using and protecting the law, and create a strong atmosphere of the rule of law. Lawmakers, administrative organs, social organizations, political parties and individuals must abide by the highest principles of law. Everyone is equal before the law, and it is impossible for any organ, group, organization, enterprise, institution or individual to enjoy extra-legal privileges and truly establish the proper authority of the law. Only in this way can judicial justice be realized to the maximum extent and judicial efficiency be further improved.