The court president's discovery procedure: a study on several issues concerning the initiation of civil retrials by the court ex officio
院长发现程序：本院依职权启动民事再审的若干问题研究

摘要

人民法院通过本院“院长发现程序”启动再审，曾经饱受批评，但该程序有我国特殊司法历程的历史沉淀成因，在新的时代，人民群众对司法公正的需求使该程序仍然有旺盛的生命力。立法的变化，尤其是检察建议制度的完善，使该程序的发生有了新的生产点。对法律条文进行文义解释，法院依职权再审的双重法律适用标准是确有错误，且需要再审，前者即错误的确定性，后者即再审的必要性，二者相辅相成，逻辑严密，不仅具有可操作性，而且将再审后如何结案的问题亦隐隐作了要求或者说准备。错误的确定性要求错误应当现实存在，且错误具有严重性。借鉴当事人申请再审的事由，举轻明重，再审事由不成立的，法院当然不能主动再审；除严重程序错误外，院长发现启动再审的案件一般是需要改判的。细节上，为有效防止随意再审和无限再审，需要通过司法解释限制再审次数。

Abstract

The "Court President's Discovery Procedure" for initiating retrials has been heavily criticized in the past. However, this procedure has historical roots in my country's unique judicial process, and in the new era, the public's demand for judicial fairness ensures its continued vitality. Legislative changes, especially the improvement of the prosecutorial suggestion system, have created new opportunities for this procedure. A literal interpretation of legal provisions reveals that the court's ex officio retrial standard is based on the dual application of law: the existence of a genuine error and the necessity of retrial. The former refers to the certainty of the error, while the latter refers to the necessity of retrial. These two aspects complement each other, are logically rigorous, and not only are they operable, but they also implicitly address or prepare for how to conclude the case after retrial. The certainty of the error requires that the error must actually exist and be serious. Drawing on the grounds for retrial applications from litigants, and applying the principle of "the lesser is greater," if the grounds for retrial are not established, the court certainly cannot initiate a retrial on its own initiative. Except for serious procedural errors, cases where the court president discovers a retrial should generally be overturned. In detail, to effectively prevent arbitrary and unlimited retrials, judicial interpretations are needed to limit the number of retrials.