【摘要】 在“审执分离”命题下，涉执行实施事项配置于执行权并无争议，“内分”与“外分”之争主要是涉执行实施事项在组织层面和人员层面的配置争议。审判权与执行权行使范围的模糊性，源于涉执行判断事项配置的不明确。就权力层面的配置而言，审判保留事项应配置于审判权，审判排除事项应配置于执行权，审判裁量事项则分别配置于审判权和执行权。就组织层面的配置而言，配置于审判权的判断事项宜由专设的执行裁判庭处理。配置于执行权的判断事项对应形成执行立案权、执行命令权和执行裁决权，三者应由不同部门行使。就人员层面的配置而言，配置于审判权的判断事项只能由法官处理，执行立案权和执行裁决权宜由法官行使，执行命令权可在一定程度上配置于非法官主体。更多还原

【Abstract】 Under the proposition of the separation of adjudication and execution, there is no dispute that execution enforcement matters are vested in the execution power; the debate between “ internal separation” and“external separation ” centers primarily on the allocation of such matters at the organizational and personnel levels. The ambiguity in the scope of adjudicative power and execution power stems from the unclear allocation of execution-related determinative matters. In terms of allocation at the power dimension, adjudication-reserved matters shall be vested in the adjudicative power, adjudication-excluded matters in the execution power, and adjudicative discretionary matters in the adjudicative power and execution power respectively. At the organizational level, determinative matters vested in the adjudicative power should be handled by a specially established execution adjudication tribunal. Determinative matters vested in the execution power correspondingly constitute the power of execution case registration, the power of execution order and the power of execution ruling, which shall be exercised by separate departments. At the personnel level, determinative matters vested in the adjudicative power may only be handled by judges; the power of execution case registration and the power of execution ruling should be exercised by judges, while the power of execution order may be allocated to non-judicial personnel to a certain extent.更多还原