Legalist Fictions and the Problem of Scientific Legitimation

The author analyzes fictions of legal positivist philosophy and their role in the scientific legitimation of modern law and political domination. The original function of legalist fictions was the establishment of legal science, which would be autonomous and independent of other social sciences and public morality. In the second half of the 20th century, legal positivist philosophy has nevertheless adopted the fiction of the just law as its scientific legitimation fiction and incorporated moral and political discourse into legal science, again.
Legal positivism and its critiques within the discourse of the sociology of law and critical legal science keep the image of a hierarchical and centralized legitimation of law. Paradoxically, current legal philosophy and theory searching for a universally valid legitimation scheme is full of many different legitimations and reveals their growing plurality and the impossibility of establishing one sovereign legitimation scheme in the current social, theoretical and political condition.     

我国刑事司法中法律评价与道德评价的冲突论

本文从刑事法律与道德的一般关系出发,阐述了刑事司法中法律评价与道德评价的关系,认为道德评价对司法人员的法律评价存在着一定的影响;文章分析了刑事司法中的法律评价与道德评价冲突的原因和方式,认为刑事法律评价与道德评价的冲突实质上是法律文化与道德文化的冲突,这种冲突在我国司法实践中有三种不同的表现方式;文章同时分析了司法实践中对于刑事法律评价与道德评价冲突的二种不同的协调方式及其利弊。     

On universal relevance in legal reasoning

The purpose of this essay is to defend a claim that a certain consideration, which I call unworkability, is universally and necessarily relevant to legal reasoning. By that I mean that it is a consideration that must carry legal weight in the justification of some judicial decisions in every legal system in which (1) all disputed matters of law can be adjudicated, and (2) all judicial decisions are to be legally justified. Unworkability's necessary relevance has important implications for a theory of relevance presented by Rolf Sartorius. On this theory, nearly all considerations that are relevant to a judicial decision are supplied by legal principles embedded in the legal rules and decisions, or by extralegal principles dependent, in some way, on the legal principles. (The exceptions to the embedding thesis that Sartorius would, no doubt, recognize are elaborated in the text but can be set aside here.) But there are possible legal systems which do not contain an embedded legal principle concerning unworkability; and nonetheless, unworkability is relevant to judicial reasoning in those systems. Hence, a theory of relevance that relies on principles embedded in the content of rules is too simplistic. Some substantive considerations are relevant for other reasons.     

司法裁判引证法律学说的功能研究——基于生效裁判文书的实证分析

法律学说是连接立法与实践的知识储备和理论桥梁,也是推动司法与社会互动的知识引擎和理论动力。学者的学术观点是法律学说的直接体现。在我国,存在司法判决引证法学学者观点的现象。实证研究表明,268份样本裁判文书中,有60位法学学者的观点被引证307次。法律学说在裁判文书中发挥着解释法律、论证说理及补充法律漏洞等作用,从而增强法官对法律事实性质或裁判结果判断的合理性和合法性,提升裁判结果的可接受性。从应然层面来看,法律学说要为司法裁判提供可能的参考答案,为司法裁判提供有效的法律方法以及通过司法裁判总结科学的司法规律。实证研究与理论分析表明,虽然司法判决可以成为法律学说的“试验田”,但是从主题任务和实践立场两分的角度看,法学与司法的适当分离是法治持续进步的阶梯。     

亚历山大·佩策尼克的法律转化与法律证成理论

亚历山大·佩策尼克一生的研究重点在于法律论证理论和认识论,特别是法律与正义上的融贯理论,在《作为合理性的理性:论法律证成》一书中提出了一套独特的法律转化与法律证成理论。在他看来,法学结论、司法裁决等既可以在法律语境之中充分证成,也可以在它之外加以证成。前者为"法律语境内充分证成",其建立在既有的法律传统之上;后者为"深度证成",它们作为商谈之最佳化条件下尽可能根本的证成而被法律人视为正当的前提提供某种支持或者批判。他成功地将法律解释的分析与我们这个时代最为核心的哲学、道德和文化问题结合起来。     

The Figuring of Morality in Adjudication: Not so Special?*

Jurisprudential debate about the grounds of law often focuses on the status of morality. Given the undoubted fact of judicial engagement with morality in legal reasoning, the key question is whether morality legitimately counts as a ground of law. This article seeks to challenge the special status accorded to morality in debates about the grounds of law. The claim I seek to advance is that very often judicial engagement with morality is not different in kind to judicial engagement with other diverse objects of legal reasoning. What the comparison tends to show is that instances of “moral reasoning” in law do not obviously challenge our account of the grounds of law. Rather these instances can be viewed as central case examples of legal reasoning. Conventional grounds of law are left untouched.     

Do a Law’s Policy Implications Affect Beliefs About Its Constitutionality? An Experimental Test

Although a substantial empirical literature has found associations between judges' political orientation and their judicial decisions, the nature of the relationship between policy preferences and constitutional reasoning remains unclear. In this experimental study, law students were asked to determine the constitutionality of a hypothetical law, where the policy implications of the law were manipulated while holding all legal evidence constant. The data indicate that, even with an incentive to select the ruling best supported by the legal evidence, liberal participants were more likely to overturn laws that decreased taxes than laws that increased taxes. The opposite pattern held for conservatives. The experimental manipulation significantly affected even those participants who believed their policy preferences had no influence on their constitutional decisions.     

判例:一种法律解释的方法--兼论我国国际私法判例制度的构建

判例法和成文法分别是普通法系和大陆法系的主要法律渊源.然而,作为一种创制法律、解释法律的技术方法而言,判例法与成文法并不是相互排斥、相互对立的.来自法官个案司法经验总结的判例法,由于其独特的直观性、灵活性,可以弥补大陆法系成文法适用与解释之不足.成文法亦是我国的传统,借鉴和移植判例制度,有助于克服我国司法解释中存在的种种缺陷,增强法律适用的确定性、灵活性和公正性.尤其在国际私法领域,立法的严重滞后,使得判例制度的引进和重构成为完善我国国际私法的一个重要路径.     

Changes in the Sources of Law in Information Society

The purpose of the paper is to indicate in which way modern digital information systems influence the range of legal sources and to assess whether such changes improve the quality of judgements and other legal decisions. The paper uses examples from Danish law but does not in any detail describe specific information systems. It takes a more general approach. At the beginning the concept of a legal source is briefly discussed and it is considered why these sources are used. Preconditions for their usage are mainly availability and comprehensibility. With this background changes with respect to general legal rules, judicial and administrative decisions in national law are discussed with emphasis on the general considerations that are made in connection with developing information systems. Next developments in connection with EU law, international law and foreign law are considered and the importance of the Internet is emphasized. At the end it is briefly considered whether the different changes will lead to an improved legal system, to better decisions. This is a possibility but only if the potential of the information society is utilized.     

司法判决理由的法律解释的不足与完善建议

司法判决理由是司法权合理化最重要的指标,也是法官思维水平的最典型表现。作为证明司法结果正当性的关键因素,法官的法律解释构成了司法判决理由不可或缺的组成部分,理应在司法判决中得以充分展示。为了改变我国判决书中法律解释状况薄弱、判决理由不充分的局面,科学合理地写明法官对案件事实和适用法律的解释状况就势在必行。     

Morality in criminal law and criminal procedure: Principles,doctrines, and court cases

One of the drawbacks of the current era of predominance of Positive Law over Natural law, is that the moral roots of criminal law are all too easily overlooked or even ignored. Yet one should always keep in mind that moral standards (and the related area of Natural Law) historically preceded any type of criminal legislation or judicial decisions. This Note describes some selected aspects of criminal law of the United States (both substantive and procedural), with occasional references to other countries where necessary. Particular attention is focused on criminal law court cases and on how they deal with morality. The author argues that much more attention should be paid to the fundamental relationship between moral values and criminal law.     

Provisional Court Protection in Administrative Disputes in Europe: The Constitutional Status of Interim Measures Deriving from the Right to Effective Court Protection. A Comparative Approach

Abstract: Interim protection in remedies against the public administration has proved to be one of the key issues in today's justice. In effect, the slowness of judicial proceedings means that final judicial decisions cannot guarantee the rights and interests of the litigants any more, because those decisions arrive too late. Thus, effective judicial protection is at stake. On the other hand, public administrations have traditionally disposed of privileges, one of the most important of them being the so‐called executive character of administrative acts. The national debate on the equilibrium between both principles—effective judicial protection and the executive character of administrative acts—needs to be exported to the Community law context. Community law should therefore learn from national experiences, as other legal orders, such as the Spanish one, have done, turning to comparative law in order to improve their own model of interim protection.     

Judges as satisficers: a law and economics perspective on judicial liability

If judges are guardians of the law, who is to protect the individual member of society from the occasional corrupt, malicious, or reckless judge? The aim of this paper is to provide an answer to the last part of this question, focusing more heavily on cases of negligently inflicted harm. Departing from Simon’s bounded rationality and influenced by other constructs in behavioral law and economics, we view judges as satisficers who make decisions within real-world constraints, such as imperfect information and uncertainty, cognitive limitations and erroneous information. Judges are limited by the commonly observed barriers to the decision making process. Because their goal is not to optimize but to render opinions that are merely satisfactory, they often act as poor agents of their principals’ interests. In this light, it becomes clearer why judges tend to engage in behavior that is “improper”, especially under the circumstances of the currently overloaded judicial caseloads. We first address the differences in judges’ roles in Anglo-American and Continental legal systems. We then present our simple model for judicial misbehavior based on an understanding of judges as “satisficers”. Next we discuss the particularities of judicial errors and introduce a realistic and viable construct of “inexcusable judicial error”. On this basis we evaluate the impact of various incentive schemes on judicial behavior, focusing on the civil liability of judges. We conclude that civil liability for grave judicial errors is the most adequate remedy.     

作为第四规则的法律方法及其功能

对司法而言,法律方法可视为除了法律、习惯和法学学理之外,法官进行司法裁判时所运用的“第四规则”,也是法官在司法中保守法律宗旨和规定,并同时有所作为的基本工具依赖.作为“第四规则”的法律方法,在司法中对法律和法治发挥着四种功能：即对法律和法治的守成功能;对法律和法治的外溢（烁）功能;对法律和法治的内卷功能以及对法律和法治的补漏功能.这些功能,有些籍由所有的法律方法获得,如守成功能;而有些籍由特定的或部分的法律方法获得.     

反对解释的场景及主体

反对解释是法治社会的一个原则。这一原则强调,对明确的法律规范,尤其是强制性法律规范,法官等法律人应该直接认定其意义并加以贯彻,而不能解释,尤其不能过度解释。反对解释的场景是个审判等活动“语境”的问题,但由于场景都是片断,因而难以从理论上系统叙述,所以,我们只是把场景作为思考的起点和归宿,在法治理念下叙说反对解释的一般要求。我们相信,法制要求人们对法律规范的固有意义保持克制,要求尊重法律的权威。能动主义是一种克服司法机械的思路。司法能动主义者几乎把严格等同于机械。但法制恰恰是因为有了适度严格才显示其魅力,如果到处能见到灵活那就不可能有法制。近百年来,几乎所有的法学都围绕着维护或破除法律的严格(或机械)而展开。但从法制基本教义看,司法克制主义是主流,而能动主义只能在克服法律过于死板,或协调法律与社会正义的严重冲突时才显现其功用。反对解释的主体是所有的适法人员,对不同的主体有不同的要求。     

The psychiatrist's guide to right and wrong: judicial standards of wrongfulness since M'Naghten

In insanity defense litigation, the precise legal definition of wrongfulness is often critically important. References in the M'Naghten Rules to the appropriate standard of wrongfulness were ambiguous, resulting in a divergence of judicial opinion as to whether wrongfulness means legal wrong, subjective moral wrong, or objective moral wrong. This article reviews and analyzes these three judicial standards of wrongfulness in the context of case law from jurisdictions that follow each of the respective standards. The evolution of knowledge of right and wrong tests of criminal responsibility is traced back to its philosophical roots. Most psychiatrists claim no expertise in matters of morality or law. The American Psychiatric Association would bar psychiatric expert testimony on the ultimate issue of insanity, on the grounds that there are "impermissible leaps in logic" when psychiatrists opine on the probable relationship between medical concepts and moral-legal constructs. Whether or not they testify on the ultimate issue, psychiatrists should ascertain the applicable standard of wrongfulness in order to properly relate their findings to the relevant legal criteria for insanity and thereby enhance the probative value of their testimony.     

公众意见在裁判结构中的地位

从裁判依据的类型分析,公众意见只能作为一种事实依据,参与个案裁判。在常规案件中,公众意见作为一种准用的辅助性依据,可以通过弱的裁量成为合理化判决结论的说明性事实。在遇有法律漏洞的疑难案件中,与社会性主张相一致的公众意见,如果耦合法律体系中的法律原则或基本权利规范,可以籍由强的裁量充当个案推理的运作性依据,成为非常情形中正当化个案规则创制的立法性事实。在日趋多元化和复杂化的转型中国,法律系统必须在稳定性和灵活性、普遍正义和个案正义之间寻求一种平衡;判断公众意见的个案裁判地位,同样需在辅助性依据或运作性依据、说明性事实或立法性事实之间寻求一种平衡。     

Bipolar disorders and the law

Bipolar disorders are a neglected subject in legal scholarship. Yet they affect decision-making across the spectrum of the law. This editorial analyses the approaches adopted across a variety of areas of legal decisions. It observes a lack of coherence in the approach of the law and attempts to identify a number of issues that are posed by the diverse symptoms of the bipolar disorders. It argues in favour of greater judicial and tribunal member education about the disorders.     

法理学的中国性、问题性与实践性

法理学不应被降格为琐碎的技术,而应坚守精神的高度,应为一种德性的法律生活提供精神的牵引与人文的支撑。法理学界在围绕法律全球化、法律理想图景、法制现代化、法治与和谐、法治与社会公平、人权保障、司法改革、法学方法论等问题展开的研究中,中国意识、问题意识、实践意识的日渐凸现,加速了法理学研究的分化与聚合、进深与提升。取道中国,立足当下,发乎问题,关注实践,将是未来中国法理学成长的支点。     

Cause Lawyers,Political Violence,and Professionalism in Conflict

This article examines how cause lawyers in conflicted and authoritarian societies balance their professional responsibilities as lawyers with their commitment to a political cause. It is drawn from extensive interviews with both lawyers and political activists in a range of societies. It focuses on the challenges for lawyers in managing relations with violent politically‐motivated clients and their movements. Using the notion of ‘legitimation work', it seeks to examine the complex, fluid, and contingent understandings of legal professionalism that is developed in such contexts, offering three overlapping ‘ideal types’ of cause lawyers in order to better understand the meaning of legal professionalism in such sites: (a) struggle lawyers (b) human rights activists and (c) a ‘pragmatic moral community'. The article concludes by re‐examining how law is imagined in the legitimation work of cause lawyers in such settings and how that work is remembered in the transition from violence.