摘要
形式主义司法三段论无法妥当地说明价值判断在法律推理的过程中作为裁判依据的基本定位。价值判断不同于事实依据和规范依据,其作为裁判依据具有明显的二阶性。在常规案件中,法官的价值判断作为"论证性依据"为裁判结果提供更加充分的说明性理由。在疑难案件中,法官的价值判断作为"决断性依据"为何以拒斥特定规则的适用提供证成,并指示相关公众意见和法律原则进行互相"加工筛选"以形成可供适用的裁判依据。论证性依据与决断性依据的识别标准是法官对可预见的裁判结果的价值认同。不论是作为论证性依据还是决断性依据的价值判断,都必须接受法律体系的约束和指引,保证法律推理具备一定的"形式性"。法官的价值判断被用来塑造技能更加高超纯熟的司法工艺师,而非"放飞自我"的政治家。
The formalistic judicial syllogism cannot properly explain the fundamental positioning of value judgment as a basis for decision in the process of legal reasoning.Value judgment is different from the factual basis and the normative basis,and it is obvious a dual-dimension structure as the judgment basis.In ordinary cases,the judge’s value judgment serves as the“argumentative basis”to provide a more sufficient explanatory reason for the decision.In difficult cases,the judge’s value judgment is used as the“decisive basis”,which provides evidence for rejecting the application of specific rules,and instructs relevant public opinions and legal principles to integrate each other to form an applicable basis of judgment.The recognition criterion of demonstrative basis and decisive basis is the value identification of the judge to the foreseeable judgment.Whether it is used as the argumentative basis or the decisive basis,value judgment must accept the restriction and guidance of the legal system to ensure that the legal reasoning has a certain“formality”.The judge’s value judgments are used to shape more skilled judicial technologists rather than politicians who“free themselves”.
作者
姜永伟
Jiang Yongwei(Law School,Dalian Maritime University,Dalian 116026)
出处
《浙江社会科学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第2期54-62,156,157,共11页
Zhejiang Social Sciences
基金
国家社科基金重大项目“社会主义核心价值观的司法贯彻机制研究”(17VHJ008)的阶段性成果。
关键词
价值判断
法律推理
二阶性
论证性依据
决断性依据
value judgment
legal reasoning
dual-dimension structure
argumentative basis
decisive basis
