With the development and improvement of the judicial system, three models of judge's responsibility system have gradually formed in China. Among them, the results responsibility model originated from the “wrong case responsibility system”, later was incorporated into the “illegal trial responsibility system”, and now is seen as a basic institutional arrangement for correcting and preventing miscarriages of justice. Procedural responsibility model, which originated from the “illegal trial responsibility system,” has now become the main mechanism for the investigation in judges' errors in handling cases and for the assessment of the quality of their handling of cases. With the start of a new round of judicial reform, the Chinese law circle is calling for respecting the rule of justice and reconstructing the judge's responsibility system. Accordingly, a new model of judge's responsibility system that concentrates on judges' violation of professional ethics begins to emerge in the theoretical discussions on judicial reform. These three models of judges' responsibility system are the products of judicial reform, with each of them having its own institutional space for its existence, as well as corresponding limitations and barriers to implementation. Through the summarization of the past three decades' experience of the development of judge's responsibility system in China, we can put forward a number of basic criteria for choosing the correct model of this system in the future.

全文详见   http://cbimg.cnki.net/Editor/2015/0924/zgfx/e0f3a59c-aaba-46ab-b031-9130f9dd627b.pdf