国家司法中民间习俗的影响力评析——中国语境中哈特与德沃金之争的反思

作为一种司法改革举措,民间习俗在一些法院中得到运用,民间习俗对国家司法的影响力也就成为需要法理论证的问题。在中国语境中反思哈特与德沃金关于此问题的观点,他们的思想仍有许多启发作用。哈特通过承认规则塑造了习俗的有效性,而德沃金则通过权利原则将习俗引入国家司法。尽管哈特与德沃金意见有所分歧,但他们从不同视角提供了习俗进入司法的实践方法。     

Objectivity,Interpretation, and Rights: A Critique of Dworkin

Law and Philosophy -     

德翁的玩意儿

“疑难案件真的没有正确答案吗？”，这是德沃金教授一篇论文的标题。说的是所有“疑难案件”都会有，也不可能没有“正确答案”。所谓正确答案，当然并非仅指法官大人的裁判，毋宁意味着裁判充盈正当性，在法律和道德上站得住脚。而且，在德公看来，这一双重站得住脚的答案，一案只有一个，是为“唯一正确答案”。尽管并非历千万纪而颠扑不破，共三光而永光，但是，其为“最佳选择”，至少满足了当下公义的要求，长远来看，     

Injustice in Robes: Iniquity and Judicial Accountability*

The paper addresses the question of judges' moral responsibility in an unjust society. How is the “moral” judge to reconcile his perception of justice with a malevolent law? Upon what grounds might judges, and perhaps other public officials, be held morally responsible for their acts or omissions? Does a positivist approach yield a more satisfactory resolution than a natural law or Dworkinian analysis? Could inclusive positivism offer any clues as to how this quandary might be judiciously resolved?     

Justice, Sanctioning, and the Justice Model

The justice model has emerged as an alternative to the discredited rehabilitative ideal as a basis for sanctioning policy. Retributivism or just deserts is offered as the primary justification for the criminal sanction in this model, although sometimes in combination with incapacitation and deterrence as companion rationales for sanctioning. Desert is, additionally, an integral component of a sense of justice that is presented as an attribute of the justice model. Desert, both as a rationale for sanctions and as the basis for justice, is drawn from the philosophical models of Immanuel Kant and John Rawls. However, these models have some rather disturbing implications that have not been addressed by proponents of the justice model. A critical examination of them and their implications for criminology is therefore in order.