庭審實質化改革是訴訟制度改革的重要內容。A市兩級法院試點改革的實證研究顯示,庭審實質化在一定程度上得到增強,但尚未型構出理想的控辯舉證與對抗,庭審結構未發生根本性變化,審判與審前的關系和功能并未明顯轉型,審判中心未能充分確立。這一現象背后既有技術層面的原因,也與改革未觸及司法結構層面、配套措施不到位等問題相關。未來改革需要進一步調整思路,強調審判決定性的系統性司法改革,而庭審實質化作為審判中心的一項重要內容,其推行應以爭議案件為適用對象,推動關鍵證人充分出庭且法庭證據尤其口頭證據效力優先,解決控辯審三方"法律語言"與出庭人員"生活語言"之間的矛盾,確定以對抗性為主調的可操作方案與具體機制。

Substantiation reform in court hearings is an important part of litigation.Empirical research on reform pilots in two levels of court in City A shows that substantiation reform has led to some improvements,but the ideal situation,where the evidence presentation of and the confrontation between the plaintiff and the defense,has yet to take shape.The basic structure of the hearings has not undergonefundamental changes:there has been no marked change in the relationships and functions of the trial and pre-trial procedures,and the centrality of the trial has not been adequately established.Technical causes underlie this state of affairs,but it is also due to the reform’s failure to touch the judicial structure,the lack of supporting measures,etc.Future reforms should fine-tune approaches to this issue,stressing the decisive role of the trial in systematic judicial reform.As an important element in the trial’s centrality,the substantiation of court hearings should be directed to controversial cases and key witnesses should be encouraged to appear in full in court.Evidence given in court,especially oral evidence,should have effective priority,and the contradictions in the "legal language"of the prosecution,the defense,and the judge should be reconciled with the"everyday language"of others appearing in court.This should be confirmed through an operable program and specific mechanisms in which confrontation is the main theme.