论文部分内容阅读
创制型案例的裁判面临着两种困境:一是“无法可司”的尴尬;二是规则缺失,社会对司法权肆意专断存在担忧。在创制型案例裁判文书中,呈现出“无法可司”与“合法性修辞”的二元裁判结构。其中,“合法性修辞”是解决“无法可司”的实践经验与方法。一方面,“合法性修辞”是判决合法的表面论据和规则创制实质遮掩,在这种遮掩之下,法院/法官创制规则裁判案件,解决了“无法可司”的难题;另一方面,“合法性修辞”本身受到“合法性”的制约,这具体表现为形式上与实质上的正当性约束。其中,“为当事人/社会所接受”、“符合公正理念”、“坚持分权原则”、“追求法治精神”等实质性限制条件构成了对法院/法官裁判的主要规制,能消除对司法权力专制的担心。
There are two kinds of dilemmas faced by the referee of the creation-type case: one is the embarrassment of being unable to be divisible; the other is the lack of rules and the society’s concern about arbitrarily arbitrary judiciary. In the case-based judgment verdict, a dual referee structure of “lawlessness” and “legal rhetoric” is presented. Among them, “rhetoric of legitimacy” is the practical experience and method to solve “can not be divisible ”. On the one hand, the “rhetoric of legitimacy” is the substantive obscuring of the legal basis for judging the surface and the creation of the rules. Under this cover, courts / judges create rules and adjudicate cases and solve the “unprofitable” problem. On the one hand, “legal rhetoric ” itself is subject to “legitimacy ”, this concrete manifestation of the formal and substantive legitimacy constraints. Among them, substantive restrictions such as “accepted by the parties / society”, “conforming to the notion of fairness”, “insisting on the principle of separation of powers” and “pursuing the spirit of the rule of law” constitute the judgment of the court / judge The main rules can eliminate the fear of authoritarian judicial power.