刑事庭前会议主持人的选择：综述与展望
The Selection of Hosts for Criminal Pretrial Meetings: A Review and Prospect

庭前会议是我国2012年《刑事诉讼法》所确立的专门处理程序性事项的制度，通过庭前会议排除非法证据对于防范冤假错案、维护程序正当、实现司法正义具有重要的理论研究意义与实践指导价值，体现了宪法人权保障条款在我国刑事司法领域的进一步发展。自庭前会议制度确立以来，各学者对庭前会议主持人的选择展开了激烈的讨论，主要存在两种观点，分别是庭前会议主持人与庭审法官应当分离，即法官分离，以及庭前会议主持人与庭审法官没有必要分离，即法官合一。对比分析两种观点及其理由，可以发现分歧产生的深层次原因是司法公正与司法效率的价值衡量与选择。鉴于我国“一元式”诉讼结构及制度背景，法官合一方是可取可行之举。未来应当在法官合一基础之上，加强审判人员队伍建设、落实被告人权利保障与赋予庭前会议决定效力，以更好发挥庭前会议制度的功能与作用。
The pre-trial meeting is a system established by China’s 2012 Criminal Procedure Law to specifically handle procedural matters. Eliminating illegal evidence through the pre-trial meeting has important theoretical research significance and practical guidance value for preventing unjust, false, and erroneous cases, maintaining procedural legitimacy, and achieving judicial justice. It reflects the further development of constitutional human rights protection provisions in the field of criminal justice in China. Since the establishment of the pre-trial meeting system, scholars have engaged in intense discussions on the selection of the host of the pre-trial meeting. There are two main viewpoints, namely, the separation of judges between the host of the pre-trial meeting and the trial judge, and the unnecessary separation between the host of the pre-trial meeting and the trial judge, namely the unity of judges. By comparing and analyzing the two viewpoints and their reasons, it can be found that the deep-seated reason for the divergence is the value measurement and selection of judicial fairness and judicial efficiency. Given the “unitary” litigation structure and institutional background in China, it is advisable and feasible for judges to unite as one party. In the future, on the basis of the unity of judges, we should strengthen the construction of the judicial staff, implement the protection of the rights of the defendant, and grant the effectiveness of the pre-trial meeting decision, in order to better play the function and role of the pre-trial meeting system.