法学方法论视野中的法官说理

法院应是人们讲理的场所,法官应该说理,通过说理以增强判决的说服力与可接受性。法官不说理导致判决的可接受性低,当前申诉、上访、执行难等现象就是明证。为此,研究法官说理方法成为加强法官说理必然途径。研究法律解释、法律推理、法律论证等法学方法有助于完善法官说理的方法,有助于从法官说理能力、说理权责、说理激励等方面构建法官说理机制。     

Prison sentences: last resort or the default sanction?

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses the sentencing purposes for penal penalties, judges’ perceptions of sentencing purposes and prison sentences, and the effects of penal sanctions. We examine judges’ positions towards different penalties, with a focus on imprisonment, since their views on the different penalties are related to their sentencing decision-making. Understanding these views is then critical for several practical and political purposes, including bridging the gap between academic discourse and legal practice. We accessed judges’ views on penal sanctions through a questionnaire and an interview. Our sample is compounded by the judges of the criminal courts from the three major cities in Portugal. Despite the most recent criminological empirical knowledge, judges valued imprisonment as the most adequate sentence, both for different crimes and for different judicial purposes. This result is not consistent with viewing imprisonment as a ‘last resort’ solution. Indeed, we did not find this ‘last resort’ position in our data, and it is not apparent in the judicial statistics on imprisonment rates. Our data highlight the importance of increasing judges’ training on criminological and sociological issues as well as the importance of changing the influence of their personal beliefs regarding penal sanctions into research-based positions.     

法治进路中的反法治现象——以法学学者不要轻易对法官"指手画脚"为视角的分析

"什么是你的贡献"是每位法学学者在探索法治进路中都有必要扪心自问的问题。显然法学学者的贡献并不在于逆程序正义而对当案的法官就该案进行"评头论足",因为这种程序不当的行为不是在创造与推进法治,相反,是通过传统的人际关系说来扼杀正义与创造社会不公。法治进路中,尽管时下法官素质不高是不争的事实,但是作为学者应给予法官应有的宽容、尊重与信任。     

律师执业利益冲突探讨

律师在执业过程中存在着不可避免的利益冲突,利益冲突的存在会影响委托人的合法权益和律师行业的信誉。西方各国律师制度对律师执业过程中的利益冲突问题作了较为明确的规定,而我国的相关规定不足,在实践中缺乏指导意义和可操作性,因此应进行完善。     

我国法官的重组与分流研究

法官职业化和精英化是法治对现代司法体制的必然要求。我国现有法官人数过多,素质不高,不能满足这一条件。因此,应在重新界定我国四级法院性质和功能的基础上,按照现代审级制度的要求确定各级法院的法官员额和任职资格,并对现任法官进行重组与分流,以优化法院人员结构,构建法官少、辅助人员多的新型法院。     

关于提高基层法官素质的思考

基层法官素质的高低,不仅关系到法院的威信,也关系到法律的尊严,更关系到全国民众对法律的信赖。因此,提高法官的思想政治素质、职业道德素质和职业技能素质至关重要。     

行政法规范之违反与过失实行行为之认定——基于新过失论的阐释

讨论行政法规范之违反与过失实行行为之认定的关系,对于我国过失犯罪,特别是业务过失犯罪的认定,有重大意义。对此,应当从不同的过失犯构造理论出发,做体系性思考。立足于行为无价值的新过失论,将过失实行行为定义为违反结果回避义务,不仅能合理限制过失不法的范围,理论立场上也更为首尾一贯;而且通过注意义务的类型化,更能贯彻刑法的自由保障功能和法益保护功能。在新过失论的框架下,行政法规范上的义务和刑法上的注意义务在范围、性质上均有不同,但也存在相同之处:前者的危险防止义务是以定型的危险为前提而课予一般人的义务,后者则是以个案事态为前提而课予(处于行为人地位的)一般人的义务。违反不以避免构成要件结果为指向的行政法规范上的义务,并不构成对刑法上注意义务的违反。而违反以避免构成要件结果为指向的行政法规范上的义务,如果该义务对于个案中的结果回避是必要的或不足的,则构成对刑法上注意义务的违反;如果该义务对于个案中的结果回避是不必要的、可替代的,或者会起消极作用,则不违反刑法上的注意义务。     

Offense Type as Determinant of Revenge and Forgiveness After Victimization: Adolescents’ Responses to Injustice and Aggression

Victims of injustice and aggression may have strong feelings about the perpetrator(s) that may impede their efforts to cope with the victimizing experience. We examined to what extent adolescents’ interpersonal responses to victimization in terms of revenge and forgiveness depend on offense type. Of 455 Dutch students from various educational levels, 379 participants reported being victimized by incidents of injustice, aggression, or violence. These incidents were categorized according to type and related to respondents’ self-reported revenge, avoidance, and benevolence toward the perpetrator. Victims of criminal offenses (physical and sexual violence, theft, and threat) reported less forgiving motivations than victims of noncriminal transgressions (bullying, ostracism, and other forms of indirect aggression). Sexual violence primarily elicited avoidance, rather than revenge. Gender differences in responses to victimization depended on offense type, too. Hence, to enhance our knowledge about revenge and forgiveness after victimization, future studies may need to take offense characteristics into account.     

法官与法律的完善和实施 --以民事审判监督为例的观念、价值和技术分析

由于法律规定和法律技术的粗疏 ,我国的民事审判监督和民事诉讼活动之间存在着前提性、结构性的断裂和缺失 ,致使检察机关的民事抗诉权启动艰难。检察机关的民事抗诉权来源于公民的权利 ,是公民权利的转化、实现和保障形式 ,它的顺利启动和行使有十分重要的意义。破解程序困境的思路是 ,以契约精神为理念 ,将检察机关的民事抗诉权的实现看作是全部国家机关对公民和社会的义务。在各种相关机关中 ,由人民法院就检察机关的民事抗诉权向当事人进行宣告 ,借以建立起民事审判监督和民事诉讼活动的链接 ,使民事抗诉权顺利启动 ,成本最低、效率最高是最能维护和体现正义、有利于维护司法尊严和权威的方法。通过技术创新促进法律的完善和实现 ,也将是法院和法官对中国法治的独特贡献。     

论合宪性解释方法

虽然合宪性解释方法在概念上会存在些许差别,但其所遵循的合宪性推定逻辑是相通的,即都体现了司法权对立法权的谦抑。合宪性解释方法中所含括的单纯解释规则,如果不与冲突规则在学理上加以区分,则很容易对合宪性解释产生认识上的偏差。目前合宪性解释方法所模本的欧陆经验,从源流上来说,最早其实可溯及至早期美国合宪性推定的理论与实践,并与回避宪法方法一脉相承。通过合宪性推定可以发现,合宪性解释方法可以从宪法方法与法律方法两个层面展开。把握其内在理路及权力逻辑,方可使其具有本土可能性。