司法作为现代社会生活的基础之一,其许多关系同时存在着对立性和共生性,因此我们应当在多种视界下的理论架构里对司法问题进行分析。就当下广受关注的能动司法而言,如果我们在分析时仅仅固守某一种理论立场,那么从形式逻辑上看就会产生歧义性问题。但是从公共政策学上看,司法政策的政治属性又决定了能动司法的歧义性问题的存在。人们围绕能动司法所展开的无论是涉及专业化或混合职能的司法权属之间的争辩,还是关于能动司法所致力于实现的实体正义或程序正义的基本价值的争论,抑或是就裁判公正或政治正确的司法可行性问题的讨论,无不显示出能动司法的歧义性问题。正视并最终解决这种歧义性问题,需要我们立足于当代我国的宪政生活本身不断地进行实践创新和理论探索。 As one of the foundations of modern social life, many of its relations exist in opposition and symbiosis. Therefore, we should analyze the judicial issues in the theoretical framework under various perspectives. In the case of active judiciary, which is now gaining much attention, there is a problem of ambiguity in terms of formal logic if we only hold to one certain theoretical position in our analysis. However, from the point of view of public policy, the political nature of judicial policy in turn determines the existence of ambiguous issues of active administration of justice. The controversy over whether judicial power is involved in professional or mixed functions, or whether it is about the basic values ​​of substantive or procedural justice that motivated justice is committed to, or whether the justice of the referee or The discussion of politically correct judicial feasibility issues all shows the ambiguity of active justice. To face and finally solve such ambiguity issues requires that we constantly carry out practical innovation and theoretical exploration based on the constitutional life itself based on contemporary China.