Abstract：There are two major modes in jury system: the jury mode and the assessor mode. Each of them is inseparable from its particular cultural tradition and social factors, and influenced by the governance pattern and characteristics of law in the countries in which it is applied. Through ages, the jury mode and the assessor mode have turned from being contradictory to being complementary and integrated with each other. These two modes are quite different in system operation, hearing scope, trial cost, and cultural tradition, which leads to sharp distinction between the two modes and complete difference in the way they operate. China needs to draw on the advantages of the jury mode in the common law system to overcome the drawbacks of the assessor mode: to further define the roles of judges and the jury to avoid the phenomenon that the jury does not play its due role in the trial; to expand the scope of the jurors to promote judicial democracy and justice; to further enrich the types of jury cases; to enforce the right of the concerned people to exercise their choice of jurors to ensure the concerned people are clear about the jurors; to strictly forbid jurors to read case files before the court trial to make the court trial real; to set strict rules for the selection of jurors and to ensure they play their due role in the trial.
王亚明. 域外陪审制度模式评介与借鉴[J]. 《深圳大学学报》（人文社科版）, 2016, 33(6): 107-113.
WANG Ya-ming. Foreign Jury System and its Implication to China’s Judicial System. , 2016, 33(6): 107-113.
2016, Vol. 33 
粤公网安备44030502007936号