后果主義視角下的法律解釋
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-14 14:18
【摘要】：后果主義指行為以后果為中心，用后果來判斷行為應否被選擇以及行為的對錯，屬于功利主義倫理學的范疇。由于傳統(tǒng)法律解釋方法的不足，本文試圖將倫理學中的后果主義思想引入法律解釋，以后果為中心進行法律解釋，亦即后果解釋。本文創(chuàng)新之處在于根據(jù)中國的實用理性精神提出一種由果尋因的法律思維方式。 傳統(tǒng)解釋方法在解釋目標與解釋因素位階上存在不足，后果解釋則探求何種解釋最能符合目前的社會生活關(guān)系與價值觀，原則上應優(yōu)先考量立法者的意圖，但又要兼顧當下特定的時空背景條件。法律適用者通過后果解釋的方式可提出優(yōu)先于立法者意圖的決定，而非僅限于法律客觀的意圖或目的本身。為探求何種解釋最符合目前的社會生活關(guān)系與價值觀，可通過一種或數(shù)種解釋因素同時適用以實現(xiàn)解釋目的。各因素之間可藉由后果評價的方式確定孰優(yōu)孰劣。在法律續(xù)造時，必須注意司法權(quán)是否會侵害立法權(quán)。因立法目的不同，法律續(xù)造會有多種可能性，法律適用者可通過后果解釋來加強說服力度，并選擇其中更符合當下社會生活關(guān)系及價值觀的法律續(xù)造。 中國人注重實踐理性，以后果為導向的思維方式見長。本文試圖從不同角度，依照不同標準，將后果分為三類：法律后果與事實后果；直接后果與間接后果；內(nèi)部后果與外部后果。后果解釋所指后果應限于事實后果與外部后果。當然這并不意味著要考量所有可能發(fā)生的事實后果與外部后果，相反，后果解釋之后果僅限于重要之后果及發(fā)生機率高之后果。 后果解釋可分為五個步驟操作：劃定后果解釋適用范圍；尋找后果；預測后果；后果評價；后果抉擇。劃定后果解釋的適用范圍，旨在確保法律適用效力，維護法律拘束原則。尋找后果，指在適用領(lǐng)域說明后，借助其它社會科學，尋找重要的后果。預測后果，是對之前選定的事實后果進行預測，進一步判斷何者為重要后果及發(fā)生機率高之后果。后果評價，則是對前述可能產(chǎn)生的后果作出評價。后果抉擇，最后抉擇最符合衡量標準者。 后果解釋并沒有被人們普遍接受，而且因其具有政治思維傾向的特征，倍受學者們詬病。責難的理由主要來自三個方面：1.危及法律確定性，容易導致法律虛無主義。但后果解釋的出發(fā)點是評價的客觀化，，僅當法律有多種解釋可能，依法學方法的解釋操作后仍有解釋空間時，才適用后果解釋；2.招致復雜后果。但后果解釋僅指重要的后果，以及發(fā)生機率高的后果，因此不會招致復雜后果；3.有違憲政精神。不管是在法律解釋有多種可能時，還是在法律續(xù)造時，后果解釋并沒有擴大法官的自由裁量空間，并未違背憲政精神。4．悖逆司法功能，法學的后果導向是不可能的，然而其卻是必要的。后果解釋雖然會導致系統(tǒng)變異的提高，然而系統(tǒng)也會制造剩余來平衡。因此其不違背司法功能。 后果解釋有其合理性：1．后果解釋符合中國的實用理性；2．后果解釋是可被證偽的科學知識，后果解釋是通過評價基礎(chǔ)的公開與后果預測的可證偽性而提高其理性，持批判理性的立場；3．后果解釋滿足了能動司法的社會要求，當司法機構(gòu)發(fā)揮其司法能動性時，它對法律進行解釋更傾向于回應當下社會現(xiàn)實和社會演變的新趨勢，而不是拘泥于舊有成文法或先例以防止產(chǎn)生不合理的社會后果，因此司法能動性即意味著通過法律解釋對法律的創(chuàng)造和補充。 后果解釋可彌補傳統(tǒng)法學方法論的不足，適應新的社會發(fā)展要求，同時具有實踐的可操作性。當法律存在多種解釋或存在法律漏洞時，應將后果解釋作為法律解釋的一種方法，以抉擇最優(yōu)解釋方案。
[Abstract]:Consequentialism refers to the consequence of an act as the center, judging whether the act should be chosen and whether the act is right or wrong by consequence. It belongs to the category of utilitarian ethics. The innovation of this paper lies in putting forward a legal thinking mode based on the Chinese practical rationality.
The traditional interpretation method has some shortcomings in the interpretation goal and the interpretation factor rank, while the consequence interpretation seeks what kind of interpretation best conforms to the current social life relations and values. In principle, the legislator's intention should be given priority consideration, but the specific time and space background conditions should also be taken into account. The decision to take precedence over the intent of the legislator is not confined to the objective intent or purpose of the law itself. In order to find out what kind of interpretation best conforms to the current social life relations and values, one or more explanatory factors can be applied simultaneously to achieve the purpose of interpretation. When renewing, we must pay attention to whether the judicial power will infringe the legislative power. Because of the different legislative purposes, there are many possibilities for the renewal of the law. Applicants of the law can strengthen their persuasion through the interpretation of the consequences, and choose the renewal of the law which is more in line with the current social life relations and values.
This paper tries to classify the consequences into three categories: legal consequences and factual consequences; direct and indirect consequences; internal and external consequences. The consequences of consequence interpretation should be limited to factual and external consequences. It does not mean that all possible factual consequences and external consequences should be taken into account. On the contrary, the consequences of interpretation are limited to the important consequences and the consequences of a high probability of occurrence.
Consequence interpretation can be divided into five steps: delimiting the scope of application of consequence interpretation; looking for consequences; predicting consequences; consequence evaluation; consequence choice. delimiting the scope of application of consequence interpretation is aimed at ensuring the effectiveness of law application and safeguarding the principle of legal restraint. Important consequences. Predictive consequences are the predictions of the factual consequences selected before, the further judgments of which are important consequences and the consequences of a high probability of occurrence.
Consequence interpretation is not generally accepted by people, and it is criticized by scholars for its political thinking tendency. The reasons for the blame mainly come from three aspects: 1. endangering legal certainty and easily leading to legal nihilism. Consequence interpretation is applicable only when there is still room for interpretation after the operation of methodological methods. 2. It leads to complex consequences. Consequence interpretation only refers to important consequences and high-probability consequences, so it will not lead to complex consequences. 3. It violates the spirit of constitutionalism. 4. Contrary to the judicial function, the consequence orientation of law is impossible, but it is necessary. Consequential interpretation will lead to the improvement of system variation, but the system will also create surplus to balance. Therefore, it does not violate the judicial function.
Consequence interpretation has its rationality: 1. Consequence interpretation conforms to China's practical rationality; 2. Consequence interpretation is a scientific knowledge that can be falsified; Consequence interpretation improves its rationality and holds the position of critical rationality by evaluating the openness of the basis and the falsifiability of consequence prediction; 3. Consequence interpretation satisfies the social requirements of active justice. When the judiciary exerts its judicial initiative, it tends to interpret the law in response to the current social reality and the new trend of social evolution, rather than sticking to the old statutes or precedents to prevent unreasonable social consequences. Therefore, judicial initiative means the creation and supplement of the law through legal interpretation.
Consequence interpretation can make up for the shortcomings of the traditional legal methodology, adapt to the new social development requirements, and has the operability of practice. When there are many interpretations or legal loopholes in the law, the consequence interpretation should be taken as a method of legal interpretation to choose the best interpretation scheme.
【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D90-051
本文編號：2242952
[Abstract]:Consequentialism refers to the consequence of an act as the center, judging whether the act should be chosen and whether the act is right or wrong by consequence. It belongs to the category of utilitarian ethics. The innovation of this paper lies in putting forward a legal thinking mode based on the Chinese practical rationality.
The traditional interpretation method has some shortcomings in the interpretation goal and the interpretation factor rank, while the consequence interpretation seeks what kind of interpretation best conforms to the current social life relations and values. In principle, the legislator's intention should be given priority consideration, but the specific time and space background conditions should also be taken into account. The decision to take precedence over the intent of the legislator is not confined to the objective intent or purpose of the law itself. In order to find out what kind of interpretation best conforms to the current social life relations and values, one or more explanatory factors can be applied simultaneously to achieve the purpose of interpretation. When renewing, we must pay attention to whether the judicial power will infringe the legislative power. Because of the different legislative purposes, there are many possibilities for the renewal of the law. Applicants of the law can strengthen their persuasion through the interpretation of the consequences, and choose the renewal of the law which is more in line with the current social life relations and values.
This paper tries to classify the consequences into three categories: legal consequences and factual consequences; direct and indirect consequences; internal and external consequences. The consequences of consequence interpretation should be limited to factual and external consequences. It does not mean that all possible factual consequences and external consequences should be taken into account. On the contrary, the consequences of interpretation are limited to the important consequences and the consequences of a high probability of occurrence.
Consequence interpretation can be divided into five steps: delimiting the scope of application of consequence interpretation; looking for consequences; predicting consequences; consequence evaluation; consequence choice. delimiting the scope of application of consequence interpretation is aimed at ensuring the effectiveness of law application and safeguarding the principle of legal restraint. Important consequences. Predictive consequences are the predictions of the factual consequences selected before, the further judgments of which are important consequences and the consequences of a high probability of occurrence.
Consequence interpretation is not generally accepted by people, and it is criticized by scholars for its political thinking tendency. The reasons for the blame mainly come from three aspects: 1. endangering legal certainty and easily leading to legal nihilism. Consequence interpretation is applicable only when there is still room for interpretation after the operation of methodological methods. 2. It leads to complex consequences. Consequence interpretation only refers to important consequences and high-probability consequences, so it will not lead to complex consequences. 3. It violates the spirit of constitutionalism. 4. Contrary to the judicial function, the consequence orientation of law is impossible, but it is necessary. Consequential interpretation will lead to the improvement of system variation, but the system will also create surplus to balance. Therefore, it does not violate the judicial function.
Consequence interpretation has its rationality: 1. Consequence interpretation conforms to China's practical rationality; 2. Consequence interpretation is a scientific knowledge that can be falsified; Consequence interpretation improves its rationality and holds the position of critical rationality by evaluating the openness of the basis and the falsifiability of consequence prediction; 3. Consequence interpretation satisfies the social requirements of active justice. When the judiciary exerts its judicial initiative, it tends to interpret the law in response to the current social reality and the new trend of social evolution, rather than sticking to the old statutes or precedents to prevent unreasonable social consequences. Therefore, judicial initiative means the creation and supplement of the law through legal interpretation.
Consequence interpretation can make up for the shortcomings of the traditional legal methodology, adapt to the new social development requirements, and has the operability of practice. When there are many interpretations or legal loopholes in the law, the consequence interpretation should be taken as a method of legal interpretation to choose the best interpretation scheme.
【學位授予單位】：西南政法大學
【學位級別】：碩士
【學位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：D90-051
【參考文獻】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前4條
1 楊知文;;司法裁決的后果主義論證[J];法律科學(西北政法大學學報);2009年03期
2 羅東川;丁廣宇;;我國能動司法的理論與實踐評述[J];法律適用;2010年Z1期
3 李仕春;;案例指導制度的另一條思路——司法能動主義在中國的有限適用[J];法學;2009年06期
4 譚融;試析美國的司法能動主義[J];天津師范大學學報(社會科學版);2003年06期
本文編號：2242952
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/falvlunwen/falilunwen/2242952.html
