法律实证主义与规范理论——规范性的三个难题

在现代法律理论中,规范性既意味着法律对行为的影响,也用以表达有别于事实的另一世界。有关法律规范性的争议可分解为三个相互关联的理论难题:制裁与义务是否具有同样的规范作用?是否只有一般性的法律规则才具有规范性?哲学实证主义与法律实证主义对规范性的理解是否相同?通过思考这些难题可以得出结论:规范问题不同于价值问题,法律实证主义能够在探讨规范问题时坚持价值无涉的立场;法律的规范性不能化约为唯一一种规范作用,对此有必要进行更加精致的研究。     

Law’s Capacity for Vagueness

This paper deals with the particularities of vagueness in law. Thereby the question of the law’s capacity for vagueness is closely related to the question of the impact of vagueness in law, since exaggerated vagueness combined with the elasticity of legal interpretation methodology may affect the constitutional principles of legal certainty, the division of powers, and the binding force of statute. To represent vagueness and the instability of legal concepts and rules, a Hyperbola of Meaning is introduced, opposing Heck’s metaphor of a core and a periphery of meaning. Furthermore, evidence is provided that the use of vague legal concepts and the capability of legal methodology to affect the specific meaning of those concepts, may give rise to astonishing and irrational changes of meaning of the law. Finally the paper sets out in search of an added value of vagueness in law, and weighs several stated pros and contras of vagueness. The paper is written against a background of the German speaking realm.     

论“约因论”在英美法系的衰落

约因理论是英美契约法的独特内容,该理论的成熟形态是"交易约因论",即契约的成立以当事人之间的交换关系为基础,通常表现为受诺人的"法律受损"的"约因"就是交易的符号。"约因论"的衰落表现在多方面,既有"禁反言"等新的契约理论对它的挑战,也有成文法对约因要求适用范围的限制,而且,传统的约因法则在司法实践中也发生变革。"约因论"固有的形式主义、僵化性、技术性等弊病决定了其衰落的历史必然性,而"约因论"的衰落也标志着英美契约法从古典向现代的历史转型。     

Legal System and Practical Reason. On the Structure of a Normative Theory of Law*

Abstract
It will be argued, firstly, that there is a link between the legal validity of a norm and the rational justifiability of a requirement that judges should apply this norm, based on a normative conception of legal validity and the postulate that judges should act as rational persons; secondly, that rational justifiability of legal norms requires the construction of a legal system in a model of principles that differs from theories, e.g., of Kelsen, Hart, Dworkin and Alexy, which are not fully adequate for a normative conception of law.     

Deduction and Justification in the Law. The Role of Legal Terms and Concepts

Abstract. Legal terms, such as “ownership,”“contract,”“validity,”“negligence,” are used as middle terms in legal deduction. The paper distinguishes two problems regarding this use. One is the logical function of terms for deduction within a normative system. Specific problems dealt with in this connection are meaning, definition, and economy of expression. The other problem connected with middle terms is the “moulding” and possible manipulation of the meaning of legal terms, for arriving at desired conclusions in a given scheme of inference. It is indicated how the moulding of contested legal concepts, if not restricted, will obscure the ratio of legal rules. This problem is relevant, inter alia, to arguments ex analogia in the law.     

The prosecutor and human rights – from the general to the particular

It is not unusual that one or all parties commit a genuine mistake when making contracts. While there is the strict general duty under the law to respect agreements, there equally exists the duty for courts and tribunals to be fair and to render commercial justice in the factual matrix of cases before them. In national legal systems and transnational law regimes, rescission for mistake on economically efficient and just terms is embedded in contractual obligations. The Solle v Butcher (1950) doctrine, which represented the English law approach, was rejected in The Great Peace (2002). Potential conflicts and crises now exist in commercial relations and international dispute resolution when ‘English law’ is the applicable law. This extends to jurisdictions where English decisions are highly persuasive. This article examines the correctness and effect of The Great Peace decision on the doctrine of equitable rescission for genuine mistake as propounded in Solle v Butcher, and possible clarifications needed after the complications brought by The Great Peace. It analyses the conceptual importance of the remedy of equitable rescission for mistake in commercial transactions, and identifies serious substantive errors of law by The Great Peace court. Finally, it provides other effective, fair and efficient legal methods that remain available to avoid the weaknesses of the decisions.     

法的一般理论及其在中国的发展

法的一般理论作为法学研究的独立分支起源于19世纪中后叶的德国,并在英美和其他国家得到广泛扩散和发展。在前苏联,经过马克思主义哲学的改造,它从一种分析法理论转型为一种社会法理论。中国法理学界对于法的一般理论的继受与发展经过了上个世纪50年代至60年代初对苏联学说的全面继受、80年代初至90年代末期的反思与突破,以及90年代末至今的开放与创新三个阶段,并逐步让位于法哲学和其他交叉学科的研究范式。以法律关系学说的变迁为线索进行梳理总结,可以发现,中国的法的一般理论研究与中国法治实践和法学进步的历史进程休戚相关,在总体框架上深受"苏联学说+民法原型"模式的影响,在研究方法上从采取单一进路开始显现出多种方法合力的端倪。法的一般理论远远没有成为"历史的遗迹",深化对它的研究应成为未来中国法理学的重要着力点。     

论我国民事诉讼行为制度的完善

民事诉讼法行为理论是构筑民事诉讼法学理论体系的基础理论之一。在近代民事诉讼法学理论中,公法关系与私法关系始终处于对立地位,在私法领域中占据重要地位的诚实信用原则,却不适合于民事诉讼法这一公法领域;随着法律社会化的演进,诚实信用原则逐渐深入公法领域,在民事诉讼行为制度中引入诚实信用原则,对于完善我国的民事诉讼行为制度具有重要意义。     

税收协定的国内适用——基于《企业所得税法》第58条的考察

《企业所得税法》第58条试图全面解决税收协定在国内适用的三个问题,即条约的国内法效力、适用方式和法律位阶。对于如何理解第58条中的"不同规定"与"办理",存在"绝对主权说"和"国际条约说"之争。虽然两种学说的理论依据和具体主张有所不同,但它们均以维护法律体系的纯粹性为最高目标。这两种学说并不符合中国的混合一元条约适用体制。当前,中国应采取更具实质主义导向的方法适用税收协定。     

The Limits of Institutionalised Legal Discourse*

Abstract. One of the most powerful accounts of the necessary connection between law and morality grounded on the openness of communication is provided by Robert Alexy, who builds a discourse theory of law on the basis of Habermas’ theory of general practical discourse. In this article I argue that the thesis based on the openness of legal discourse is problematic in that it does not provide a convincing account of the differentiation of legal discourse from other practical discourses. I offer an understanding of the institutionalisation of legal discourse as the tacit commitment of the participants to their shared normative experience and in particular in: 1) the possibility of containing normative force in space, 2) the possibility of transforming word into deed, 3) the possibility of grasping and controlling time and 4) the possibility of transforming deed into word. That commitment of participants in legal discourse is revealed as a set of fundamental assumptions embedded in all legal utterances, which provide the necessary bedrock that makes communication possible. It also provides a basis for the institution of legal discourse, to the effect that their problematisation signifies a departure from the latter.     

论不能未遂的处罚依据——主观危险理论之再提倡

对于不能未遂的处罚依据的认识,当下中国学界主要存在客观危险说、经验的危险感说以及主观危险说三种理论。客观的危险理论及其修正与经验的危险感说在理论本质以及判断逻辑方面都存在一定的问题。与之相对,主观的危险说具有与规范判断紧密相关的正当性依据,能够和我国本土刑法学理论与法律制度衔接,并且能构建逻辑自洽的着手概念。从正当性依据的角度来讲,法益侵害的危险是行为对规范的违反,通过行为哲学与刑法构成要件理论的双重证明,主观危险理论的正当性通过其与规范违反的紧密关联被体现出来;从与本土法律制度的衔接来看,我国刑法的故意概念包含的“认知”与“意欲”要素,为主观危险理论的“规范违反事实认知”要件与“规范违反行为推动”要件提供了刑法理论与制度的土壤;从着手概念的构建来看,结合主观危险理论的上述两个要件,行为着手的时点也能够合理地被构建出来。从主观危险理论中可以提炼出不能未遂案件司法判断的“三步走”的方法论,从而在分析实际案例中最终达到说理的科学性与结论的妥当性。     

相对积极主义刑事司法观的提倡

新的十六字方针是法律体系建成之后的必然选项,其实质是追求法律的正当性与司法的公正性,提倡一种相对积极主义的司法理念,强调社会安全与司法人权保障的平衡。司法积极主义是对简单遵循文义的专属主义反思化的结果,并非意味着基于秩序安宁而造法。司法克制主义和积极主义,都有相同的出发点。二者的根本分歧在于如何理解解释法律、寻找法律和创造法律的关系。绝对的积极主义因存在明显的违背教义学和罪刑关系的痕迹而应当引以为戒,相对积极主义因包含着法律的道德价值从而更能促进公正性的实现。当前我国的司法犯罪化理论如果被不加甄别地践行,或者不进行细致化的推演,可能具有绝对积极主义色彩而走向公正的反面。因为刑法包含着规范属性和道德属性,这意味着人道精神与法定理念互为补充,意味着公正和人道成为刑事司法的目标。相对积极主义的特征是注重方法论的合刑性以及合宪性要求。     

Remarks on the Normativity of International Legal Rules and Global Constitutionalism

The article reflects on the possibility of conceptualising the complex problem of the normativity of international legal rules, including in particular the phenomenon of “relative normativity.” The author utilises the critical potential of Ronald Dworkin's proposal for a new philosophy of international law to reflect on the classical accounts explaining normativity of international law. By building on Dworkin's argument, the author argues for a constitutional account of international law. The far‐reaching constitutional proposals may provide a more complex and coherent set of possible rationalisations of international legal rules. International law is in great need of a comprehensive theory that could better explain its normative character as well as its sources, and it is argued that international constitutionalism has the potential to serve this purpose.     

民法强行性规范研究

为推介中国人民大学法学院博士培养成果,搭建论文品评乃至学术评价之平台,《法学家》自本期起专辟"博文精萃"一栏。该栏目由两部分组成:其一是"论文要旨",由博文作者对其博文进行全面系统而重点突出的介绍,一般宜包括如下要素:博文的体系架构;博文每章节的主要内容;博文的主要特点;博文的主要创新和不足;博文所研究领域的课题展望。其二是"论文评议",可以是答辩委员会的论文审查意见,或者评审专家的点评,具体宜包括如下要素:对论文的总体评价;对论文的体系及各章节的评价;对论文创新的评价;指出论文的不足以及进一步完善的方向。敬请关注并提出宝贵建议。     

法学话语中的法律解释规则

法律解释方法的核心是法律解释规则,即各种理解、解释和运用法律的规则。几乎所有关于法律解释方法的理论,其目标都是探寻法律解释规则的构建与运用。为了证成这一判断,梳理与不同意识形态相匹配的具体法律方法很有必要。这种概括不是对法律方法纯粹历史的考察,重心在于说明法律解释规则的实践意义。我国的法律方法论研究即将进入第二个发展阶段,即在关注一般理论研究的基础上,开始法律解释规则及其运用研究。这是展现法学理论和法律方法论实用品格的开始。对法律解释规则的认识可以从多个角度展开,重点从法治意识形态、法律方法的进化以及与相近概念的比较三个方面进行诠释。     

Sources,Recognition and the Unity of the Legal System

A critical analysis of Kelsen’s theory leads to a broad concept of custom, which covers diverse types of customary norms, where the always required conviction of legal bindingness depends on different types of factual and normative reasons. In it we should include a strict concept of custom or legal usage, derogating custom, custom of general international law, custom that establishes an unwritten constitution, custom that establishes a new written constitution, judicial custom which creates a rule of precedent and custom newly expressed in the judicial application of customary rules. The basic norm could be formulated as a constitutive norm: ‘If the norms created through the first historical constitution are effective, then the first historical constitution (and all the norms derived from it) are valid.’ It is thus a customary constitutive rule that recognizes the first historical constitution as valid law. Norms which establish sources of law are constitutive rules, they can be customary norms or legislated norms, but if they are legislated, they have their validity recognized by, directly or indirectly, a constitutive customary norm. By using a broad concept of custom as a conventional practice, Hart implies that general recognition of a customary rule, together with the practice that accompanies it, are sufficient conditions of validity. A doctrine of recognition that is arrived at by means of criticism and a rational reconstruction of the doctrines of Kelsen and Hart regains the essential theses of the traditional recognition theory of Bierling and Engisch.