论贝勒斯程序正义理论

发布时间：2018-07-03 03:43

本文选题：对抗式审判模式 + 错误成本　；参考：《辽宁大学》2012年硕士论文

【摘要】：对于程序正义这一命题的研究，在法理学领域可谓繁复，但通常关注的是在个别领域或着某一特定条件下进行研究和探讨，就有关是否能提出一个普遍的、一般性的理论的学者仍不多见，然而迈克尔·D.贝勒斯在其著作《程序正义—向个人的分配》中进行了一次深刻的尝试。《程序正义—向个人的分配》可谓是迈克尔·D.贝勒斯的一部成就卓越的著作，作为佛罗里达州立大学的一名教授，，贝勒斯在法律哲学领域的造就是有目共睹的，就如格里根（英国学者）说的那样，贝勒斯的综合性程序理论的提出对于程序正义理论研究领域的贡献是巨大的，可以说在这个方面他的贡献足以与边沁相提并论。贝勒斯对于“程序”一词的语境做出了明确的界定，贝勒斯认为，“程序”一词通常情况在以下三种语境下被使用：做出集体决定或选举代表的程序，典型的是议会程序；对争端双方进行裁决的程序，典型的是民事诉讼；做出是向对方承担复旦或享受利益的决定的程序，典型的是行政行为和刑事追诉行为。而贝勒斯所主张的大多是在第三种界定下进行的。贝勒斯一直试图提出一个关于程序正义的一般性理论，他从对抗式审判模式为研究对象，对该模式下的传统原则进行了深刻的分析，他认为，之所以选择对抗式审判模式作为研究对象是因为，这种模式不仅被人们所熟知，而且其包含了程序正义的核心原则。贝勒斯认为在对抗式审判模式之下，程序的恰当性依赖于错误成本（error costs）、道德成本（moral costs）、直接成本（direct costs）、过程利益（process-benefits）这四个要素。只有在最小化（EC+MC+DC-PB）之和的情况下程序才是一个恰当的程序。这一公式的提出不仅是贝勒斯程序正义理论的核心也是对于程序正义理论研究领域的一大贡献。当然贝勒斯也指出，这一评价程序的基本理论是在对抗式审判模式下的，在此之外的情形下有可能并非绝对。本文试图通过四个部分阐述就作者对于贝勒斯程序正义理论的研究内容，第一部分阐述了贝勒斯对于程序正义价值独立性之论证。第二部分阐述了程序价值原则之适用问题。第三部分阐述了贝勒斯程序正义理论的贡献与困境。第四部分阐述了贝勒斯程序正义价值理论中的一些思想观点对于中国司法实践的借鉴意义。
[Abstract]:The study of the proposition of procedural justice can be described as complicated in the field of jurisprudence, but it is usually concerned with the research and discussion in a particular field or under a particular condition, and the possibility of proposing a universal one. General theoretical scholars are still rare, however, Michael D. Berles made a profound attempt in his book "procedural Justice-Distribution to the individual." procedural Justice-Distribution to the individual "is Michael D. A remarkable book by Bayles, a professor at Florida State University, whose work in the field of legal philosophy is obvious to all, as Gligan said. Bayles' comprehensive procedural theory is a great contribution to the research field of procedural justice theory, which can be said to be comparable to Bentham's contribution in this respect. Berles defined the context of the word "procedure" clearly. In his opinion, the term "procedure" is usually used in the following three contexts: the procedure for making collective decisions or electing representatives, typically the parliamentary procedure; The procedure for adjudicating the parties to a dispute is typically a civil action; the procedure for making a decision to assume Fudan or enjoy the interests of the other party; the typical procedure is administrative act and criminal prosecution. Most of what Berles advocated was carried out under the third definition. Berles has been trying to come up with a general theory of procedural justice. He has made a profound analysis of the traditional principles of the adversarial trial model. The reason for choosing adversarial trial model as research object is that it is not only well known, but also contains the core principle of procedural justice. In the adversarial trial mode, Berles believes that the appropriateness of procedure depends on the four elements of false cost, (error costs), moral cost, (moral costs), direct cost, (direct costs), process benefit (process-benefits). Only when the sum of EC MC DC-PB is minimized is a proper procedure. This formula is not only the core of Bellus' procedural justice theory, but also a great contribution to the research field of procedural justice theory. Of course, Berles also points out that the basic theory of this evaluation procedure is in the adversarial trial mode, and it may not be absolute in other circumstances. This paper attempts to elaborate the content of the author's research on the theory of procedural justice in four parts. The first part expounds Berles' argument on the value independence of procedural justice. The second part expounds the application of procedural value principle. The third part expounds the contribution and predicament of Beerles' procedural justice theory. In the fourth part, the author expounds the reference meaning of some ideas in the theory of the justice value of Beerles procedure for the judicial practice in China.
【学位授予单位】：辽宁大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D90

【相似文献】