法律体系的自治性

发布时间：2018-02-28 00:56

本文关键词： 法律体系自治性构成性规范排他性理由　出处：《中国政法大学》2011年博士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：法律体系问题是一个复杂而且重要的问题,不少法学家对此问题有过研究。从一些比较具有代表性的法学家的著作来看,这些研究在某些方面虽然已经取得了比较深入的研究结果,但是,还是在不同程度上存在着许多问题。具体体现在两个方面:一是将法律体系的研究技术化、琐碎化,将原本应该是前瞻性、基础理论性以及总体反思的法律体系研究变成了一个在现有立法体制之下的对于实证性法律体系的修修补补。另一方面的表现就是与此相反对,将法律体系的研究在相当大程度上扩展到更大的范围中,从经济、社会、政治、文化等角度来观察和分析法律体系。这两种研究路径都有其合理性和科学性的一面,但是,缺陷也是明显存在的。第一种方法只见树木不见森林,抓不住法律体系问题核心。第二种方法没能注意到法律体系的规范性特征。基于此,法律体系的研究核心问题应该是其自治性问题。对于法律体系自治性问题的研究比较深入和具有代表性的有奥斯丁、哈特、凯尔森、拉兹等人,所以,本文的第一章首先分析和解释哲学和逻辑学中的自治性何以可能,以及由此反观法律体系自治性何以可能。第二章分析了奥斯丁的法律体系自治性理论,指出其将体系的自治性建立在主权者理论上的缺陷和不足,由于这些不足之处的存在,体系的自治性是完不成的。第三章分析了哈特的法律体系的理论。哈特分析并提出初级规则和次级规则,以这两类规则的有机结合来解释和描述法律的本质并实现法律体系的自治性。不过,由于承认规则性质的暧昧不明,从而体系的自治性也实现不了。第四章分析了凯尔森的体系理论。如果要保持法律的纯粹性特征的话,法律体系不可避免地要实现自治,否则伦理的、道德的因素总会自觉不自觉地进入到法律体系中来。为了实现法律体系的自治性,凯尔森在运用了康德批判哲学中的论证方法,以基本规范的预设和论证方式来构建体系的自治性。但是,由于基本规范没有处理好事实层面问题,从而将复杂的法律体系建构问题简单化处理了,因此,也不能够成功实现体系自治性的要求。在分析了前面几个具有代表性理论,并结合第一章所揭示的自治性的标准和要求基础上,在第五章本文提出了法律体系自治性所必然具备的特征同时也是必须具备的要求。首先,从行为理由的角度来看,体系中的规则必须作为排他性的理由。由此又可以推出另一个要求,即社会中权威性机构的存在。其次,体系中处于最高效力层次上的规范,如宪法性规范必须是构成性的。同样,由此也可以推出法律规范及其体系应该是实践性生成的。
[Abstract]:The question of the legal system is a complex and important issue, which many jurists have studied. From the works of some more representative jurists, Although these studies have made some in-depth research results in some aspects, there are still many problems in varying degrees. They are embodied in two aspects: one is to make the research of the legal system technical and trivial, The study of the legal system, which should have been forward-looking, theoretical and overall reflection, has been transformed into a patchwork of the positivist legal system under the existing legislative system. On the other hand, the opposite is true. To a large extent, the study of legal system is expanded to a larger scope, and the legal system is observed and analyzed from the angle of economy, society, politics, culture and so on. These two research paths have their rationality and scientific side, but, The defects are also evident. The first approach is to see only the trees and the forest, and the core of the legal system problem. The second method fails to notice the normative characteristics of the legal system. Based on this, The core of the study of the legal system should be its autonomy. The research on the autonomy of legal system is more in-depth and representative, such as Austen, Hart, Kelsen, Raz and so on. Therefore, the first chapter of this paper first analyzes and explains how autonomy in philosophy and logic is possible. The second chapter analyzes Austen's theory of legal system autonomy, and points out that the autonomy of the system is based on the defects and deficiencies of the sovereign theory. The autonomy of the system is not complete. Chapter three analyzes Hart's theory of the legal system. Hart analyses and proposes the primary rules and secondary rules. The organic combination of these two types of rules is used to explain and describe the nature of the law and to achieve the autonomy of the legal system. So the autonomy of the system can not be realized. Chapter 4th analyzes Kelsen's theory of the system. If we want to maintain the pure character of the law, the legal system will inevitably achieve autonomy, otherwise the ethical, Moral factors always come into the legal system consciously or unconsciously. In order to realize the autonomy of the legal system, Kelsen used the argumentation method of Kant's critical philosophy. The autonomy of the system is constructed by the presupposition and argumentation of the basic norms. However, because the basic norms do not deal with the problem of fact well, it simplifies the construction of the complex legal system. Nor can the requirement of autonomy of the system be successfully achieved. Based on the analysis of the previous representative theories and the criteria and requirements of autonomy revealed in the first chapter, In Chapter 5th, the author puts forward the necessary characteristics of the autonomy of the legal system as well as the necessary requirements. First of all, from the point of view of the reasons for conduct, The rules in the system must be used as grounds for exclusivity. Another requirement can be derived from this: the existence of authoritative institutions in society. Secondly, the norms of the system at the highest level of effectiveness, If constitutional norms must be constitutive, it is also possible to infer that legal norms and their systems should be practically generated.
【学位授予单位】：中国政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2011
【分类号】：D90

【参考文献】