基于合法性价值的法概念研究 摘 要

　　摘 要：法概念问题——也就是“什么是法律”的问题——是法哲学的核心议题。这个问题之所以古老和重要，端在于作为法律实践反思结构的合法性价值之规范证立性。合法性价值指涉的是法律实践自身的本旨或理性。围绕合法性价值而产生的竞争性诠释塑造了不同的法律概念观，一种适格的概念理论即是以一种内在参与者的视角来提出和确证何种合法性观念是最值得辩护的。

　　以近三十多年以来法律实证主义与德沃金的理论论辩为背景，根据法概念与合法性价值的问题联结，我们可以用效率、公平以及整全性三种合法性价值来组织有关法律之概念本质的思考。其中，一方面，不同的合法性价值直接会导致对实证主义来源命题的支持和反对；另一方面，对合法性价值独特性的准确理解又有赖于合法性环境这个概念工具。按照这两个思路，以效率为中心的合法性价值强调，法律的本旨在于通过可预期性和合理规划的方式来确保对行为的指引以及促进社会合作。效率价值为实证主义的来源命题提供了道德证立。此其一。其二，以公平为中心的合法性价值认为，法律的本旨在于运用公平程序解决广泛存在于现代社会的合理分歧。然而，基于民主多数决的公平论证是失败的，其偏颇地依赖于决定程序而忽略了审议程序；对理性审议程序的强调则导致公平价值不再支持实证主义的来源命题。其三，以整全性为中心的合法性价值主张，法律的本旨在于政府以一个声音说话，以一个具原则性且融贯的方式来行动，进而以平等关怀和尊重的正义原则来完成全社会的价值统合。

　　实际上，合法性作为一种价值概念，其毋宁反映了法治这一政治理念。以合法性价值为主轴的法概念探究其实也是在直接回答法治问题，法律和法治应该放在一起来综合思考。有鉴于此，效率、公平以及整全性三种合法性价值与形式法治观、程序法治观以及实质法治观可以建立一一对应的关系。在这个意义上，对三种合法性价值的判定也就是重新梳理和思考形式法治观、程序法治观和实质法治观三种法治观念。

　　基于对现代社会之多元复杂性的诊断，我们认为完全着重于法律的来源与形式的实证主义及形式法治观所提供的是一种不充分的法律想象。相反，程序法治观和德沃金的实质法治观则敢于面对价值多元和合理分歧的合法性环境，从而把以正义原则为内容的程序性理由论辩许诺为法律的核心本质。当然，这个法律的想象并没有完全舍弃法律的制度性来源和法治的形式品质，因为在日常政治的条件下，法律的制度性来源是原则重构的依据，法律的权威颁布则使程序性理由论辩获得实在的形式。因此，一种充分的法律概念理论需要把法律的形式性道德、程序性道德以及实质性道德贯通起来。概言之，在多元复杂的现代社会下，法律的价值或本旨乃是在既有制度和历史的基础上，透过程序性的理由论辩，找到一种公共正义观念并且是最佳的公共正义观念来代表共同体。只有透过形式性的来源、程序性的理由论辩以及实质性的正义原则这三个面向，我们才能把握法治这一政治理想，以及法律概念的本质属性。

　　关键词：法概念 合法性价值 合法性环境 法治

　　ABSTRACT

　　The concept of law has been the central issue of legal philosophy. Theendurance and importance of the problem lies in the normative justificationof the value of legality, which indicates the reflexive construction of legalpractice. The value of legality refers to the point or rational of legal practice.

　　The contested interpretation about the value of legality has shaped differentconceptions of law, and an eligible legal theory should justify a mostattractive conception of legality from an internal point of view.

　　In the context of the Positivism-Dworkin debate thirty years on, wecan organize the study of the nature of law in terms of the value of legality,which includes efficiency, fairness and integrity. On the one hand, whetheror not the source thesis of legal positivism could be sustainable isdetermined by the contested value; on the other hand, the accurateunderstanding of the value of legality needs to be clarified in accordancewith the circumstances of legality. Thus firstly, according to the value ofefficiency, the point of law consists in advancing action-guiding and socialcooperation through predictability and rational planning. Efficiencymorally justifies the source thesis. Secondly, according to the value offairness, the point of law consists in resolving reasonable disagreements inmodern society through fair procedure. However, the fairness argumentfrom the majority rule is infeasible, because it prefers decisive procedure todeliberative procedure. The conception of reasoned deliberation leads to thefailure of the source thesis. Finally, according to the value of integrity, thepoint of law requires the government to speak with one voice, to act in aprincipled and coherent manner, to integrate values into the justiceprincipal of equal concern and respect.

　　In fact, Legality as a value concept undoubtedly expresses the idea ofthe rule of law. The inquiry of the concept of law also directly answers theproblem of the rule of law. Accordingly, efficiency, fairness and integrityrespectively correspond to the formal, the procedural and the substantiveconception of the rule of law. So, we can reflex the three values of legalityin terms with rethinking the above three conceptions.

　　Basing on the diagnosis of the plural complexity in modern society,we hold that the positivism and the formal conception of the rule of law,exclusively highlighting the sources and form of legality, can’t offer anadequate imagination of law. On the contrary, the procedural andsubstantive morality of the rule of law correctly faces to plural values andreasonable disagreements, so that procedural argument of reasons aiming atthe justice principle is promised by the central nature of law. Of course, thisimage doesn’t discard the institutional sources and the formal merits oflegality. We should remember that the institutional sources are the groundof principle reconstructing, and the authoritative issuances of law makeprocedural argument of reasons into reality. Thus, an adequate legal theoryshould integrate the formal morality, the procedural morality and thesubstantive morality into the concept of law. In a word, in the circumstanceof legality of the plural complexity society, the point or value of law is tofind a best common scheme of justice in name of the society, and theachievement of the common scheme can not separate with the intuitionalsources and procedural argument of reasons. Only if we think of the threeaspects of legality together, can we grasp the political idea of the rule oflaw, and the conceptual nature of law.

　　KEY WORDS：the concept of law, the value of legality, circumstances oflegality, rule of law.
返回本篇博士论文目录查看全文     下一章：导论