【摘要】： “民間法”術(shù)語的產(chǎn)生乃是基于“法律多元主義”的立場,即在法律體系中,不僅包括國家法,還包括與國家法并存且一起起作用的其他法律,民間法即在其中。既然民間法活生生地存在著,那么它勢必要走向司法,在司法實(shí)踐中爭取它的話語權(quán),因此有關(guān)民間法司法運(yùn)用問題就擺在了我們面前,成為我們不得不予以回答的問題�；诖朔N關(guān)懷,本文進(jìn)行了相應(yīng)的研究,分設(shè)六章,前兩章著重分析民間法司法運(yùn)用的價(jià)值及其理論基礎(chǔ),接下來的三章分別從實(shí)體、程序、方法角度研究民間法司法運(yùn)用的具體問題,最后一章探討應(yīng)當(dāng)加強(qiáng)的制度建設(shè)。 第一章：挖掘民間法司法運(yùn)用的價(jià)值。將民間法引入司法審判,首先面臨的一個(gè)前提性的問題是對民間法司法運(yùn)用的價(jià)值進(jìn)行論證。司法的場域運(yùn)行表明民間法在司法中強(qiáng)有力的存在,與此同時(shí),由于和諧社會命題的提出以及對司法解決糾紛功能的重視,民間法司法運(yùn)用的價(jià)值不是被夸大了,而是還沒有得到充分的挖掘。具體而言,民間法司法運(yùn)用的價(jià)值體現(xiàn)在：第一,它有利于規(guī)范法官的自由裁量權(quán)。民間法以其相對客觀的存在,為法官在行使自由裁量權(quán)時(shí)提供了一種外在的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),一定程度地構(gòu)成了對法官自由裁量權(quán)的限制；第二,它有利于實(shí)現(xiàn)案結(jié)事了,推進(jìn)和諧司法,促進(jìn)社會和諧；第三,它有利于司法活動順應(yīng)主體社會生活的權(quán)利要求,維護(hù)法律的權(quán)威；第四,它有利于實(shí)現(xiàn)有效的社會治理,達(dá)致善治。 第二章：闡明民間法司法運(yùn)用的理論基礎(chǔ)。文章指出,政治國家與市民社會的良性架構(gòu)、大傳統(tǒng)與小傳統(tǒng)的理性溝通、形式正義與實(shí)質(zhì)正義的動態(tài)平衡、法律教義學(xué)有效性與社會學(xué)有效性的適度兼容,為民間法的司法運(yùn)用提供了理論支持。市民社會是法治運(yùn)行、發(fā)展的社會根基,我們必須努力促進(jìn)多元利益主體、公共領(lǐng)域、民間社會組織和社會自治的良性發(fā)展,與之相應(yīng),應(yīng)當(dāng)給予在民間社會組織內(nèi)所形成的“成文化的自主性規(guī)則”以特別的重視與關(guān)注,這些規(guī)則有相當(dāng)一部分是民間法的重要組成部分,在司法實(shí)踐中構(gòu)成了法律的主要來源之一。與此同時(shí),也應(yīng)看到,由于鄉(xiāng)土社會處于蛻變、市民社會尚處于培育中,所以中國法文化中的傳統(tǒng)“本土資源”還可有條件地加以利用,那些散落在民間的傳統(tǒng)資源因其自身的實(shí)用性質(zhì)以及對特殊利益的靈活保護(hù)而仍然具有價(jià)值；在中國法治建設(shè)與發(fā)展的過程中,大、小傳統(tǒng)的斷裂使得國家在社會中陷入了合法性危機(jī),因此需要建立某種機(jī)制以有效地溝通大、小傳統(tǒng),化解精英話語與大眾話語之間的緊張態(tài)勢,這就要求在法律的制定與適用時(shí)注重利用民間的智識資源,注重大眾話語所具有的合理機(jī)能,與嚴(yán)格地局限于國家制定法的藩籬相對應(yīng),承載著民間智識與大眾話語的民間法理應(yīng)是法律適用者所要考慮的因素之一；在法治的建設(shè)與發(fā)展過程中,還需要在形式正義與實(shí)質(zhì)正義之間建立動態(tài)平衡機(jī)制,一方面避免因形式正義的過分統(tǒng)治致使法治成為壓制,另一方面避免因?qū)嵸|(zhì)正義的過分統(tǒng)治致使法治消解在自身的無序之中。因此,法官在對類似情況進(jìn)行類似處理的過程中,需要對不同情況加以不同對待,需要考慮個(gè)案所處的具體環(huán)境,需要在關(guān)注法律邏輯的同時(shí)對生活邏輯給予應(yīng)有的理解與同情,一定程度地允許用特殊的衡平手段來糾正國家法律,如此一來,民間法進(jìn)入司法便成為可能；此外,在法的實(shí)際運(yùn)作過程中,還需要兼容法律教義學(xué)有效性與社會學(xué)有效性,適度地援引民間法,從而避免因過分偏執(zhí)于國家法而造成法的有效性之不足。 第三章：揭示民間法的法源地位。從司法立場而言,以歷史眼光觀之,雖然在理性強(qiáng)音的推動下,西方法典編纂運(yùn)動興起,但是在司法實(shí)踐中并非完全否定了民間法的法源地位。在中國傳統(tǒng)司法中,民間法作為法源更多地是與其他法源混合適用,并且很難以正式淵源或非正式淵源來予以界定。在當(dāng)今之中國,民間法的法源地位發(fā)生了內(nèi)部分化：在刑法、行政法等領(lǐng)域,如果關(guān)涉到對公民權(quán)利的限制或剝奪的,則應(yīng)排除民間法的法源地位,而為了消解制定法的僵硬性,能夠建立新的合法化事由的民間法則是允許的；在民法、商法等領(lǐng)域,民間法至少具有次位法源地位,在某些特殊情況下,民間法的法源地位也可以優(yōu)先于國家制定法。從法治發(fā)展及其憲制化過程來看,成文化的民間法是法律的正式淵源,而習(xí)慣法和準(zhǔn)成文的民間法是法律的非正式淵源。盡管基于司法立場的法律淵源理論為法官法源提供了大致的方向,也一般性地規(guī)定了民間法的法源地位,然而,民間法在司法實(shí)踐中具體境遇時(shí)有差異,一定程度地說明了法律淵源理論只能以靜態(tài)的方式為民間法司法運(yùn)用提供實(shí)體上的支持。 第四章：探討民間法進(jìn)入司法的途徑與識別。在我國司法實(shí)踐中,民間法進(jìn)入司法主要通過以下幾種途徑,即立法認(rèn)可、司法解釋、最高法院發(fā)布的意見、地方法院制定的指導(dǎo)意見、典型案例指導(dǎo)、法官自由裁量權(quán)的運(yùn)用等。盡管民間法進(jìn)入司法的途徑有多種,但是民間法的運(yùn)用并非一路坦途。在法律淵源理論中,民間法的存在是一個(gè)確定性的概念,然而在司法實(shí)踐中民間法是否存在就不是一個(gè)十分確定的事情,其自身所具有的局限性使得民間法的識別成為必要。民間法的識別是當(dāng)事人對民間法的證明以及法官對民間法的確認(rèn),其包括識別的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)即民間法應(yīng)當(dāng)具有實(shí)效、合法、良法之品質(zhì),識別的程序即啟動、舉證與確認(rèn)。民間法的識別體現(xiàn)了民間法司法運(yùn)用的動態(tài)特征,它為民間法司法運(yùn)用提供了程序上的支持。 需要指出的是,法律淵源理論為民間法司法運(yùn)用提供了一種實(shí)體意義上的可能,民間法的識別為民間法司法運(yùn)用提供了具有可操作性的程序保障,而兩者皆為民間法與法律方法的勾連提供了必要的支持。如果沒有法律淵源理論,那么民間法進(jìn)入司法進(jìn)而成為個(gè)別規(guī)范的來源即失去基礎(chǔ)；如果沒有民間法的識別,即經(jīng)過當(dāng)事人的舉證與法官的確認(rèn),那么民間法司法運(yùn)用也就難以實(shí)現(xiàn)從可能到現(xiàn)實(shí)的轉(zhuǎn)化。只有在實(shí)體上可能、程序上支持的情況下,才使得民間法與法律方法的勾連問題得以拓展開來。 第五章：著重于民間法與法律方法的可能勾連。在司法裁判過程中存在著復(fù)雜的建構(gòu)性活動,即法官建構(gòu)了大小前提,正是在法官對大小前提的構(gòu)建過程中,民間法與法律方法的勾連成為一種可能,從而為民間法司法運(yùn)用提供了方法上的支持。民間法司法運(yùn)用的方法具體體現(xiàn)在：第一,法律發(fā)現(xiàn)在一定程度上體現(xiàn)了法官需要適當(dāng)?shù)匕l(fā)揮主觀能動性,在法律淵源中找到適合本案的恰當(dāng)規(guī)則,因此作為法律淵源之一的民間法成為法律發(fā)現(xiàn)的場所之一,并通過法律發(fā)現(xiàn)進(jìn)入司法；第二,在法律適用的過程中,法律解釋是不可避免的,然而它也不是機(jī)械地囿于制定法,在適度開放的解釋策略之下,民間法作為法律的解釋源得以進(jìn)入司法；第三,法律自制定以來即以其自身存在漏洞為特征,所以需要相應(yīng)的補(bǔ)救方法,利益衡量即在其中。通常來講,“結(jié)論的可接受程度之大小”構(gòu)成了評價(jià)利益衡量的正當(dāng)與否的基礎(chǔ)。由于在對沖突利益的評判方面,民間法往往體現(xiàn)了民眾的立場與價(jià)值取向,反映了民眾的心理,所以在利益衡量中注重運(yùn)用民間法,案件結(jié)果容易得到民眾的認(rèn)可,裁判的可接受程度也會大大地增加,民間法通過利益衡量補(bǔ)充法律漏洞從而進(jìn)入司法；第四,案件事實(shí)的確認(rèn)首先需要理解生活事實(shí)的法律意義,然后再就生活事實(shí)是否存在展開證明,一般而言,證明方法有兩種,即通過證據(jù)證明案件事實(shí)的存在和根據(jù)經(jīng)驗(yàn)法則或邏輯思維推斷出案件事實(shí)的存在。由于民間法自身蘊(yùn)含著經(jīng)驗(yàn)法則之內(nèi)容,因此民間法有可能成為案件事實(shí)的確認(rèn)依據(jù)從而進(jìn)入司法；第五,對于法官來說,對裁判結(jié)果進(jìn)行論證并說服當(dāng)事人予以接受,是其職責(zé)所在。當(dāng)事人之所以能夠接受,不在于外在的強(qiáng)力,而是在于內(nèi)心的認(rèn)同,在于裁判理由與人情事理相通。因此,如果法官適度地援引民間法作為論證的理由,無疑會增加論證的可接受性,促使當(dāng)事人對判決更加心服口服,也正如此,民間法作為法律論證的理由進(jìn)入司法。 第六章：闡明民間法司法運(yùn)用所需要加強(qiáng)的制度建設(shè)。在我國司法實(shí)踐中有關(guān)民間法運(yùn)用存在著一些問題,針對這些問題需要加強(qiáng)相關(guān)的制度建設(shè),主要包括立法應(yīng)進(jìn)一步明確民間法的法源地位并加強(qiáng)民間法司法運(yùn)用的程序建設(shè),建立健全案例指導(dǎo)制度,建立健全多元化糾紛解決機(jī)制,加強(qiáng)民間法的規(guī)范化整理并建立健全司法審查機(jī)制。
[Abstract]:The term "folk law" is based on the position of "legal pluralism", that is, in the legal system, it includes not only the national law, but also other laws that coexist and work together with the national law, in which the folk law is. Since the folk law exists vividly, then it is bound to go to justice and strive for it in judicial practice. Based on this concern, this paper makes a corresponding study, divided into six chapters, the first two chapters focus on the analysis of the value of the judicial application of folk law and its theoretical basis, the next three chapters are from the entity, procedure, square. The last chapter discusses the system construction that should be strengthened.
Chapter One: Excavating the Value of the Judicial Application of the Folk Law. One of the prerequisites for introducing the Folk Law into the Judicial Trial is to demonstrate the Value of the Judicial Application of the Folk Law. The value of judicial application of folk law is not exaggerated, but has not been fully excavated. Specifically, the value of judicial application of folk law is embodied in: first, it is conducive to standardizing the discretion of judges. An external standard, to a certain extent, constitutes a restriction on the discretion of judges; secondly, it is conducive to the completion of the case, promote harmonious justice, and promote social harmony; thirdly, it is conducive to judicial activities to comply with the claims of the main social life, safeguard the authority of the law; fourthly, it is conducive to the realization of effective social governance. Reason makes good governance.
Chapter two: expounds the theoretical basis of the judicial application of folk law. The article points out that the benign structure of political state and civil society, rational communication between big tradition and small tradition, dynamic balance between formal justice and substantive justice, moderate compatibility between the validity of legal doctrine and the validity of sociology provide theoretical support for the judicial application of folk law. Civil society is the social foundation for the operation and development of the rule of law. We must strive to promote the benign development of multi-stakeholders, public spheres, civil society organizations and social autonomy. Accordingly, special attention should be paid to the "cultural autonomy rules" formed within civil society organizations. These rules have some similarities. At the same time, we should also see that the traditional "indigenous resources" in Chinese legal culture can also be conditionally utilized, and those scattered among the people can be passed on because of the transformation of the local society and the cultivation of the civil society. Unified resources are still valuable because of their practical nature and flexible protection of special interests; in the process of the construction and development of China's rule of law, the break of big and small traditions has led the country into a crisis of legitimacy in society, so it is necessary to establish a mechanism to effectively communicate the big and small traditions and dissolve the elite discourse and the public. The tension between discourses requires that in the enactment and application of the law, attention should be paid to the use of civilian intellectual resources, to the rational functions of public discourse, and to the fences strictly limited to state statutes. The civil jurisprudence, which carries folk knowledge and public discourse, should be considered by law applicants. First, in the process of the construction and development of the rule of law, it is also necessary to establish a dynamic balance mechanism between formal justice and substantive justice. On the one hand, the excessive rule of formal justice should be avoided to make the rule of law oppressive, on the other hand, the excessive rule of substantive justice should be avoided to cause the rule of law to dissolve in its own disorder. In the process of dealing with similar situations, it is necessary to treat different situations differently, to consider the specific circumstances of the case, to give due understanding and sympathy to the logic of life while paying attention to the logic of law, and to allow, to a certain extent, the correction of national laws by special and equitable means. Thus, civil law enters the department. In addition, in the actual operation of law, it is necessary to be compatible with the validity of legal doctrine and sociology, and to quote civil law appropriately, so as to avoid the deficiency of the validity of law caused by excessive paranoia with national law.
Chapter 3: Revealing the status of folk law as the source of law. From the judicial standpoint, from a historical perspective, although the Western codification movement has risen under the impetus of rational voice, it does not completely negate the status of folk law as the source of law in judicial practice. In traditional Chinese judicature, folk law as the source of law is more mixed with other sources of law. In today's China, the status of the source of law of the folk law has undergone internal differentiation: in criminal law, administrative law and other fields, if it involves the restriction or deprivation of civil rights, the status of the source of law of the folk law should be excluded, and in order to resolve the rigidity of the statute law, can be. It is permissible to establish a new legitimate cause of civil law; in civil law, commercial law and other fields, civil law has at least the status of secondary source of law, and in some special cases, the status of legal source of civil law can also take precedence over state statutory law. Customary law and quasi-written folk law are the informal sources of law. Although the theory of legal origin based on judicial position provides a general direction for the source of law for judges, it also generally stipulates the status of legal origin of folk law, however, the specific circumstances of folk law in judicial practice vary, to a certain extent, it shows that the theory of legal origin is only based on judicial position. It can provide substantive support for the judicial application of folk law in a static way.
Chapter Four: Discusses the ways and identifications of civil law entering judicature. In China's judicial practice, civil law enters judicature mainly through the following ways: legislative approval, judicial interpretation, opinions issued by the Supreme Court, guidance made by local courts, guidance of typical cases, application of judges'discretion, etc. In the theory of legal origin, the existence of folk law is a definite concept. However, in judicial practice, the existence of folk law is not a very definite thing, and its own limitations make the identification of folk law necessary. The identification of law is the proof of civil law by the parties and the confirmation of civil law by the judges. It includes the criterion of identification, that is, the quality of civil law should be effective, legal and good law, the procedure of identification should be started, and the proof and confirmation should be given. Procedural support.
It should be pointed out that the theory of legal origin provides a substantial possibility for the judicial application of folk law, and the identification of folk law provides an operable procedural guarantee for the judicial application of folk law. Both of them provide necessary support for the collusion between folk law and legal methods. If there is no identification of folk law, i.e. evidence from the parties and the confirmation of judges, then the judicial application of folk law will be difficult to realize the transformation from possible to realistic. Only when the substantive and procedural support is available can the folk law and law be made. The problem of linking methods has been expanded.
Chapter Five: Focusing on the possible connection between folk law and legal method. In the process of judicial adjudication, there are complicated constructive activities, that is, the judge constructs the size premise. It is in the process of the judge's construction of the size premise that the collusion between folk law and legal method becomes possible, thus providing a method for the judicial application of folk law. The methods of judicial application of civil law are embodied in the following aspects: Firstly, legal discovery to a certain extent reflects the judge's need to give full play to his subjective initiative and find the appropriate rules suitable for the case in the legal origin. Therefore, as one of the legal origins, civil law has become one of the places where the law is discovered, and through legal discovery, it can be found. Second, in the process of law application, legal interpretation is unavoidable, but it is not mechanically confined to the statute law, under the moderately open interpretation strategy, folk law as the source of legal interpretation can enter the judiciary; third, since the law has been formulated, it has its own loopholes as a characteristic, so it needs corresponding. Generally speaking, the "acceptability of the conclusion" constitutes the basis for evaluating the legitimacy of the interest measurement. Because the folk law often reflects the position and value orientation of the people and reflects the psychology of the people, it pays attention to the application of the interest measurement. Folk law, the result of a case is easy to be recognized by the public, and the acceptability of adjudication will be greatly increased. Folk law supplements legal loopholes through interest measurement to enter the judiciary. Fourthly, the confirmation of the facts of a case needs to understand the legal meaning of the facts of life first, and then prove the existence of the facts of life. There are two methods of proof, that is, to prove the existence of the facts of a case by evidence and to infer the existence of the facts of a case by empirical rules or logical thinking. It is the duty of the parties to argue and persuade the parties to accept it. The reason why the parties can accept it lies not in their external strength, but in their internal identification, and in the fact that the reasons for adjudication are connected with human affairs. The parties are more convinced to take the judgment orally, which is why the folk law has entered the judiciary as a legal argument.
Chapter Six: To clarify the system construction needed to be strengthened in the judicial application of folk law. There are some problems in the application of folk law in China's judicial practice. To solve these problems, we need to strengthen the relevant system construction, mainly including legislation should further clarify the legal source status of folk law and strengthen the procedure construction of judicial application of folk law. Establish and improve the case guidance system, establish and improve a diversified dispute resolution mechanism, strengthen the standardization of civil law and establish a sound judicial review mechanism.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2010
【分類號】：D916

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 李亮;;農(nóng)村糾紛解決機(jī)制中的民間法——以民間法研究學(xué)術(shù)報(bào)告為素材[J];甘肅政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年04期

2 李翔;;對現(xiàn)行正式法文化屬性的一種反思——以當(dāng)代中國民間習(xí)慣法的“情理”觀為出發(fā)點(diǎn)[J];中華文化論壇;2011年06期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 田小豐;論刑事和解[D];復(fù)旦大學(xué);2012年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 劉珍;民族習(xí)慣法司法適用探析[D];中南民族大學(xué);2011年

2 張維;貴州黔東南州苗族民間法的司法適用[D];廣西師范大學(xué);2012年

3 周守俊;論藏族習(xí)慣法的司法適用[D];廣西師范大學(xué);2012年

4 高慶萍;農(nóng)村糾紛解決的現(xiàn)狀及對策研究[D];河北師范大學(xué);2012年

，

本文編號：2176467