司法方法在裁判中的运用——法条至上、原则裁判与后果权衡

发布时间：2018-03-06 11:32

本文选题：司法方法　切入点：法条至上　出处：《中国社会科学》2017年06期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：法条至上、原则裁判和后果权衡为法官处理不同类型的案件提供了有效的分析工具和裁判方法。法条至上强调法官必须遵守法条的字面含义。法条至上既是现代司法运行的通例,也是法治社会对法官最基本的要求,不按照法条及其字面含义判决仅仅是特例或者例外。但是,当法条缺乏、按照法条的字面含义无法裁判甚至会导致不公正、荒谬的裁判,或者法条冲突无法抉择时,需要求助于内含相关价值判断的法律原则、道德原则和政治原则。在缺乏法条、与上述三种原则没有关系或者关系不密切、法条冲突、原则冲突、利益冲突、违背常识等疑难案件中,需要权衡后果进行裁判。三种司法方法既可以单独使用,也可以综合运用,综合能够增强其裁判的说服力,但无损于司法方法的独立性。不同的司法方法构成了裁判的基础。
[Abstract]:The rule of law is supreme, The principle of judgment and the balance of consequences provide effective analytical tools and methods for judges to deal with different types of cases. The supremacy of legal provisions emphasizes that judges must abide by the literal meaning of the articles of law. The supremacy of laws is a general rule of modern judicial operation. It is also the most basic requirement of the rule of law society, not according to the law and its literal meaning is only a special case or an exception. However, when the law is lacking, according to the literal meaning of the law can not be adjudicated or even lead to unfair, absurd judgment. Or when conflicts of laws and articles cannot be decided, they need to resort to legal principles, moral principles and political principles that contain relevant value judgments. In the absence of articles of law, they are not related to or are not closely related to the above three principles, and conflict of laws and articles of law, conflicts of principles, In difficult cases, such as conflicts of interest and violation of common sense, we need to weigh the consequences to adjudicate. The three judicial methods can be used separately or comprehensively, which can enhance the persuasive power of the judges. But it does not undermine the independence of judicial methods. Different judicial methods form the basis of adjudication.
【作者单位】：中山大学法学院;
【分类号】：D926.2

【二级参考文献】