论司法裁判的形式合法性与实质合理性

发布时间：2018-09-04 08:43

【摘要】：公正裁判的标准是什么?这是古往今来法学家们苦苦思索的问题。不同时期,法律巨匠们会给出不同的答案。在价值领域,我们无法得出通行古今、横贯中西的统一标准。然而,这并非意指裁判没有标准,司法人员可以根据主观意愿恣意裁判。事实上,每个时代,各个学派都有自己的主流标准,即公正裁判标准。当下,形式合法、实质合理是衡量司法裁判公正的基本标准。本文除引言外,共分为四章。第一章,讨论司法裁判的基本问题,从裁判的传统与方法、司法裁判的价值取向、实现路径三方面展开。如何做到公正裁判?确立裁判标准后,需要从司法裁判技术层面探讨法律实施问题。在案件审理过程中,要正确适用法律,需要在真实证据材料基础上确认案件事实,然后根据已确认的案件事实寻找可援用的法律规定,据此作出裁判结论。这一过程就是运用法律推理的过程。法律推理具有思维与实践相统一的辨证特点,它是主体在法律实践中从已知的前提材料出发,通过逻辑推理,论证新结论的思维活动。法律推理是法律方法论的重要研究领域,依照推理过程中是否寻求价值判断,法律推理分为形式法律推理与实质法律推理,涉及法律价值理由的是实质法律推理,否则便是形式法律推理。第二章,从理论背景、逻辑审析、具体适用三方面就司法裁判形式的合法性问题展开讨论。司法裁判的形式合法性要求在法律适用过程中,依照同样前提得出相同的结论,在具体运用中不惨杂或较少惨杂法律适用者的自由裁量因素,对所有人都奉行统一规则,不因人而异实行区别对待。其追求观念上的形式平等和形式合理性,以期达到形式法治。司法裁判的实质合理性是指司法裁判过程中运用实质法律推理,结合一定价值判断进行推理,使裁判结论符合一定价值取向。第三章,就司法裁判实质合理性的理论背景、价值冲突与衡平、具体适用三方面问题进行探讨。从某种意义上说,司法领域的法治是形式法治与实质法治的双重治理。司法裁判的形式合法性追求形式法治,实质合理性追求实质法治,即法治的实现路径是寻求司法裁判形式合法性与实质合理性的统一。由于历史原因,大陆法系国家较重视形式法律推理与形式合法性研究,英美法系国家较重视实质法律推理与实质合理性研究。在研究维度方面,两大法系有不断靠拢、融合的趋势。研究司法裁判的形式合法性与实质合理性关系对正确适用法律,追求裁判正义具有重要意义。然而,国内外广大学者的研究大都局限于形式合法性与实质合理性之一,就二者关系及适用的研究仍属空白。第四章,首先提出我们需要一个可供操作的指数,用以指导裁判工作;其次从司法裁判形式合法性维度讨论案例指导制度的适用;最后从司法裁判实质合理性维度探讨陪审团制度的引入及其本土化。
[Abstract]:What is the standard of fair judgment? This is a question that jurists have been struggling to think about throughout the ages. At different times, legal giants give different answers. In the field of value, we can not come to pass the ancient and modern, across the Chinese and Western unified standards. However, this does not mean that the judge has no standard and that the judicial officer can judge arbitrarily on the basis of his own will. In fact, in each era, each school has its own mainstream standard, that is, the standard of fair adjudication. At present, the form is legal, the essence is reasonable is the basic standard which measures the judicial judgment justice. In addition to the introduction, this article is divided into four chapters. The first chapter discusses the basic problems of judicial adjudication, from three aspects: tradition and method, value orientation and realization path. How to be fair judge? After establishing the judgment standard, it is necessary to discuss the implementation of the law from the technical aspect of the judicial judgment. In order to apply the law correctly, it is necessary to confirm the facts of the case on the basis of the true evidential materials, and then to find the applicable legal provisions according to the confirmed facts of the case, and draw a conclusion accordingly. This process is the use of legal reasoning process. Legal reasoning has the dialectical characteristics of thinking and practice. It is the thinking activity of the subject to demonstrate the new conclusion through logical reasoning from the known premise materials in the legal practice. Legal reasoning is an important research field of legal methodology. According to whether to seek value judgment in the process of reasoning, legal reasoning is divided into formal legal reasoning and substantive legal reasoning. Otherwise, it is formal legal reasoning. The second chapter discusses the legality of judicial judgment form from three aspects: theoretical background, logic analysis and concrete application. The formal legality of the judicial decision requires that in the process of applying the law, the same conclusion is reached according to the same premise, that the discretion of the person who applies the law is not complicated or less miserably applied in the concrete application, and that the uniform rules are applied to all persons. There is no difference between people. It pursues the concept of formal equality and formal rationality in order to achieve formal rule of law. The essential rationality of judicial judgment is to use substantive legal reasoning in the process of judicial adjudication, combining with certain value judgment to infer, make the judgment conclusion accord with certain value orientation. Chapter three discusses the theoretical background, value conflict and balance, and concrete application of judicial judgment. In a sense, the rule of law in the judicial field is the dual governance of the formal rule of law and the substantive rule of law. The formal legitimacy of the judicial judgment pursues the formal rule of law, while the substantive rationality pursues the substantive rule of law, that is, the path to the realization of the rule of law is to seek the unity of the formal legitimacy and the substantive rationality of the judicial judgment. For historical reasons, civil law countries pay more attention to formal legal reasoning and formal legitimacy, and Anglo-American law countries attach more importance to substantive legal reasoning and substantial rationality. In the research dimension, the two legal systems have a trend of convergence and integration. It is of great significance to study the relationship between formal legitimacy and substantial rationality of judicial judgment for the correct application of law and the pursuit of judicial justice. However, most of the researches of scholars at home and abroad are limited to one of formal legitimacy and substantial rationality, and the research on their relationship and application is still blank. In the fourth chapter, we first propose that we need an operational index to guide the adjudication work, and then discuss the application of the case guidance system from the perspective of the legality of the form of judicial adjudication. Finally, the introduction of jury system and its localization are discussed from the dimension of the rationality of judicial judgment.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D926

【参考文献】