法治视野下的法官自由裁量权研究 中英文摘要

　　温馨提示：该篇为本篇博士论文中英文摘要，如需阅读全文，请移至本文末尾

　　中文摘要:法官自由裁量权在任何法治国家都是一种客观存在，它是一种法治手段，服务于法治建构，服务于法治发展。但是，在中国特定发展时期，法官自由裁量权没有获得其在法治发达国家获得的认同和尊重，权力行使的现实不仅加重了社会公众的疑惑和抵触，也引起学术界的深深忧虑，如何规制和优化法官裁量权逐渐成为一个非常现实的问题。对权力主体内在思维力量的挖掘和外在司法技术含量的提升，是除了制度构建以外最重要的革新因素。全文分为上下篇，除导论，共十章，主要内容概述如下。

　　导论概括了课题研究的理论与实践意义，对国内外关于法官自由裁量权的论述做了综述，概述了本文的思维视角、研究方法、写作框架和基本内容。

　　第一章法治与法官自由裁量权。本章对法官自由裁量权做了概述分析，从法理学层面讨论了自由裁量权的理论基础及现实基础，提出"严格规则还是自由裁量”

　　的问题实际上折射出法治与人治的关系问题，从而引出对法治问题的关注，进而从法治的要义、目标、道路等角度分析法官拥有自由裁量权的必要性，从裁量权可能提供的秩序、正义、人权保障等价值论证法官自由裁量权的重要性。

　　第二章法官自由裁量权比较研究。判例法国家的法官有较大的造法权力，与之相应，他们的裁量权拥有深厚的传统底蕴和坚强的民间呼应，法官行使裁量权的过程也是推动法律进步的过程。大陆法系法官以恪守成文法文义为己任，他们在裁判中的裁量权较之英美法系法官的同行要小得多，他们更善于在法律文本中寻求真理性。中国法官成长于“情法两平”的司法文化土壤中，看重情理伦常，习惯于“情判”式的自由裁量，但是立国后的成文法司法模式又强化了法官的法条思维，使得法官常常在情法之间左右徘徊，表现在自由裁量上就是走向两个极端。

　　第三章法官自由裁量权多维解读。法官自由裁量权在司法过程的各个重要阶段皆有明显表达。在认定事实方面，法官对证据形态、举证责任、证据证明力必须给予准确判断；在认知法律方面，法官必须选择正确的法律方法就法律条文给出确定的含义；在不同诉讼类型中，法官需要发挥主观能动性努力实现不同的部门法目的；在不同的法律价值面前，法官必须协调好形式与实质、个人与社会、公权与私权、合法性与妥当性之间的复杂关系。法官自由裁量权无处不在，这也正是司法活动人文性的具体体现。

　　第四章影响法官自由裁量权的因素分析。本章讨论了影响法官自由裁量权行使结果的诸多要素，这是建构权力规制模式的基础。法官行使裁量权首先建立在其自身的法律知识之上，既包括法律文本也包括法律精神；法官内在的道德感和独有偏见也是一双无形之手在推动他的思维，法官的阅历与经验时常在暗示法官内心确信的方向，法官的社会意识、政治意识、职业安全意识会极大地推动法官形成某种裁量结果或克制住内心的冲动。在复杂的裁量权运行机理当中，各种因素在反复博弈，综合成一个结果，可以看出，如果不关注法官思维过程，想依靠外力规制法官自由裁量权行使，并不现实。

　　第五章法官自由裁量权规制的理想模式构建。本章提出以法治的制度和方法来对权力加以控制，即不以长官意志、个人爱好、运动式的教育活动、忽左忽右的临时调整做急功近利的规制，而要从权力主体的视角出发，尊重权力运行规律，培育权力主体的职业和道德修养，提升权力主体的技术能力，加强制度监督等方面做综合理性的思考，进一步提出要通过统一法律思维方式、统一法律方法运用规则来实现不同主体在思想与行为上的一致性。也只有实现了权力行使的高度一致，才可能获得社会认同并巩固司法权威。

　　第六章与自由裁量权有关的现实问题。本章讨论了能动司法、司法民主与自由裁量权的关系。能动司法一直是理论与实务界争论较多的问题，能动的尺度与法官裁量的尺度有时候互为正当性证明的标准，两者均存在如何恪守底线的问题，逾越底线，不仅招致社会反感，也会使司法职能落空。同时，后者是前者的手段，离幵良好的自由裁量，能动司法就变成了越位司法。司法民主被认为是监督司法权的制度设计，作为司法民主代表的人民陪审制度也被寄予厚望，但是实践落差真实存在。我们需要做的是引入普通人思维对法官权力行使进行修正，以争取民意的方式提升司法权威，虽然很困难，但是必须坚持。

　　第七章方法论一：发现和阐释法律。这一章穿插案例探讨法官解读法律过程中的自由裁量问题。在解读法律的时候，法官会用到各种法律方法，选择不同的法律方法，而不同的法律方法也包含不同的法律技术。如果法官使用一致的法律方法解释法律、填补法律漏洞，我们能够期待法官在类似案件里给出类似决定，如果法官没有受到统一的法律方法教育，凭借个人经验和直觉选择某项法律方法，将难免带有浓厚的个人色彩，在行使裁量权时逾越边界。

　　第八章方法论二：推理和论证理由。推理论证是复杂的技术和心理过程，法官在这个阶段更多地表现出个人的法学素养和人文素养，自由裁量的空间也十分广阔。在法律规定不明晰的案件中，在案件事实存疑的情况下，法官如何确定推理大前提和小前提，如何形成内心确信，这都考验着法官的思维能力。至于在论证结论时，选取什么样的素材作为说理的有力补充，也在法官的权限范围之内。我们可以假定，当法官习惯于运用法律思维进行推理论证，且拥有适于解决疑难案件的广阔视野，由自由裁量带来的对法官职业水准的质疑会得到极大稀释。推行统一的思维模式是一种解决裁量权滥用的实证方法。

　　第九章方法论三：衡量与优选方案。利益衡量是一种法律方法。对于那些法律规定明确，事实也较清晰的案件，一般不会运用利益衡量。但对于法律给出了一定裁量空间的案件，法官需要在各个皆可的方案中选择适当的方案解决当下的问题，这时候法官需要运用利益衡量的方法进行最优化的平衡。一般情况下，利益衡量只是使我们坚定选择某种方案的信心，但是在特殊情况下，他会促使法官形成内心信念，决定法官裁判的方向。

　　第十章结语：自由中的不自由。本章引用了一个案例，对法官裁量权运用过程进行了详细的解读。通过对不同观点和理由的分析，得出结论，法官裁判过程是主体与客体进行交流对话的过程，是一个深度的思维碰撞和博弈的过程。法官行使裁量权不可能不受到主观因素的影响，这本身并不可怕，因为人文社科活动就是心理活动和思维活动，必然带有个体色彩。只是我们在法律人技术方法培养和人文底蕴养育方面应更加注重同质性，使不同的权力主体能够在同一语境下对话，用一种思维方法看待问题，以内在自觉来弥补外在制度控制带来的监督无力感。

　　关键词：自由裁量权；法治；法律方法；法律思维

　　Abstract:Judge's discretion is an objective fact in any country of rule of law. It is a method ofrule of law，serving the construction and development of rule of law. But in certain stageof development in China，judge's discretion has not enjoyed the acceptance and respectas in developed countries. The reality of the exercise of power has not only given rise tothe resistance and suspicion from the public，but also the disquiet from the academiccircle. How to control and optimize the power of judge's discretion has been an actualissue. To develop the inner thinking ability and exterior technical content are the mostimportant factors of progress, in addition to the construction of system. The textcomposes of two parts: ten chapters except for the introduction. The content issummarized as follows:

　　Introduction summarizes the academic and practical sense of the study. Thearguments concerning the judge's discretion are summed up, and also the view of thought,means of study of the study, etc.

　　Chapter one, which analyses the academic and practical foundation of the judge'spower of discretion, For the perspective of philosophy and jurisprudence, it is proposedthat the issue of strict rules or discretion mirrors the relationship between the rule bylawand the rule by man, thereby leading to the attention to the issue of rule by law. Thischapter then analyses the necessity of power of discretion from the perspective of import,objective and path of rule of law, and the importance of power of discretion from theperspective of values it can possibly provided, such as order, justice and human right.

　　Chapter two is comparative studies，analyzing the obvious difference between civillaw, common law and Chinese legal system, concerning the power of judge's discretion.

　　Chinese judges grow up against the cultural background that the proportion and law mustbe both considered. From the view of legal heritage，judges are accustomed to discretionappealing to emotion. However, the judicial pattern of written law，being established afterliberation, has strengthened the thinking way of legal provision. This confusion makesjudges move forward to two extremes.

　　The third chapter puts forward the realm of judge's power of discretion. In thematter of fact identification，judges should give correct assessment of the form ofevidence，burden of proof and competence of evidence. In the matter of the cognition oflaws，judges should give their definite meanings by using correct legal methodology.

　　Judges also should realize the legal purpose of different department laws actively,coordinating the complex relationship between the form and substance，the individualand society, public powers and private rights，the legitimacy and appropriateness.

　　Therefore，power of discretion is omnipresent, which is an embodiment of the humanitiesof legal activities.

　　Chapter four discusses many elements that are influential in the result of discretion-Judge's discretion bases on his legal knowledge, including laws and legal spirit; judge'sthoughts are pushed forward by his inner conscience and prejudice; judge's experienceoften suggests the direction of moral certainty, judge's social sense, political sense andsense of professional safety would strongly promote judges to arrive at a conclusion orget over internal bias. The operation mechanism of discretion is very complex, it isunrealistic to control the exercise of judge'discretion by means of outside force,without attention to the process of judge' thinking.

　　The fifth chapter indicts that the power of judge' discretion sould be controled, bythe system and method of rule of law, not by the utilitarian ways such as educationalactivities and interim adjustment. We should respect the nature of the power, promotejudge's professional capability, moral cultivation and judicial technology, from the viewof the subject of power. It is a pragmatic way to unify the way of legal thinking and legalmethodology to achieve the consistency of thinking and activities. It is only by highlyunified exercise of powers, can the judge's discretion be accepted and judicial authorityassured.

　　Chapter six focuses on practical issues concerning judge's discretion such as judicialactivism and judicial democracy. Judicial activism has caused many debates in boththeoretical and practical extent. Not only judicial activism but also judge's discretionshould abide by the bottom line of legitimacy，otherwise，the judicial function would failand bring about antipathy. Without good discretion, judicial activism would beyondjudicial authority. Judicial democracy, such as the people's jury, is deemed as a favorablesystem to supervising powers，however the reality is far from satisfaction. The process ofrenovation will be difficult，but it deserves.

　　Part twoChapter seven is to reveal the process of dialogue between judges and the laws. Itdisplays how the judges exercise their power of discretion during the process of readinglaws. Judges will use various judicial skills to resolve legal issues, if they can choose thesame legal methodology to explain laws or fill up where laws have defects，we couldexpect same cases treated equally. Provided judges have not received unified educationof legal methodology, their discretion would go with rich personal features as the resultof personal experience of intuition.

　　Chapter eight concentrates on the study of legal reasoning and argument. Legalreasoning and argument is a very complicated technical and mental process. During thisprocess, judges show their particular knowledge of law and humanistic quality withbroad sphere of discretionary power. In the event that the facts are not clear and the lawis undefined，should the judges wisely ascertain the major premise and the minor premise.

　　As for the argument, judges should choose powerful materials as supplement. This is alsoan issue of thinking ways. Therefore, it is an positive measure to pursuer unified thinkingmodel to keep away from the abuse of powers.

　　The ninth chapter mainly discusses the relationship between discretion and balanceof interests which is an important methodology of jurisprudence. Especially in thosecases where the law has granted certain spaces of discretion, should the judges select themost favorable scheme among those acceptable. Generally speaking, balance of interestsonly makes us more self-confident on what we have chosen, however in particularcircumstance, it will make judges form inner belief, and determine the ultimate directionof adjudication.

　　The last chapter tells about a case to illustrate the judicial wisdom of judge'sdiscretion. Based on the analysis of various viewpoints and reasons, it is concluded thatthe process of adjudication is a process of dialogue between the subjects and the objects,a process of thoughts collision. Judges cannot immune against subjective factors, becausehumane activity is moral action and thinking action，with remarkable personalities. Solong as we pay much attention to the homogeny of judicial personality，theconscientiousness of subjects will make up the powerlessness of external supervision.

　　Key words: power of discretion; rule of law; legal methodology; legal thinking
返回本篇博士论文目录查看全文     下一章：导论