司法义务理论之构造

发布时间：2018-04-06 04:27

本文选题：疑难案件　切入点：司法义务　出处：《清华法学》2017年03期

【摘要】：由于法律理论缺乏司法义务的概念,这导致我们的裁判实践中存在一种普遍谬误,即主张既有法律已无助于疑难案件的裁判,于此情形法官应诉诸法律之外的政治、经济、道德等非法律性标准进行裁判。在绝对的司法义务、适度的司法义务以及绝对的道德义务中,适度的司法义务相对较为可取,它包含不得拒绝裁判、以依法裁判为原则以及为裁决提供论证三个层次的内容,同时兼顾了裁判受规范拘束与实现个案正义。为推进和落实这种司法义务,需要重整传统的法律渊源理论,尤其是要发掘原则以及法秩序等重要的元素。
[Abstract]:Due to the lack of the concept of judicial obligation in legal theory, there is a general fallacy in our practice of adjudication, that is, the judge should resort to the political, economic, and extralegal aspects of the law in such a case that the existing law is no longer helpful to the adjudication of a difficult case.Judge according to non-legal standards such as morality.Among the absolute judicial obligations, the moderate judicial obligations and the absolute moral obligations, the moderate judicial obligation is relatively preferable, which includes the principle of not refusing the adjudication, the principle of the adjudication according to the law and the three levels of argumentation for the adjudication.At the same time, the judge is bound by the norm and realizes the case justice.In order to promote and implement this kind of judicial obligation, it is necessary to reorganize the traditional theory of legal origin, especially to explore the important elements such as principle and legal order.
【作者单位】：中国政法大学比较法学研究院;
【基金】：国家社科基金重大项目“构建中国特色案例制度的综合系统研究”(16ZDA068)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D926

【相似文献】