法律原则、自由裁量与良法价值理念的构建

实证主义法学与新自然法学派博弈之论点在于法律是由单纯法律规则还是由法律规则、法律原则和政治道德构成的。实证主义法学在强调法律为双重规则统一体的基础上，承认包括法官造法意义上的自由裁量权的存在；而以德沃金为代表的新自然法学派则认为法律构成除规则外，还存在原则和政治道德等因素，且主张自由裁量行为是法官在法律规定幅度内的司法行为，如超越此圭臬，就是一种法官的恣意行为、不正义行为。两者在法律构成上的长期激烈争论，旨在证成何种构成模式的法能最大效应地体现人类社会所追求的公平、正义和秩序的规范价值理念，或言之，法律应具有何种有效体系，方能消除人治状态而实现良法之治。

Construction of Legal Principle, Discretion and Concept of Good Law

The game between jurisprudence of positivism and school of new natural law indicates that the former holds that law is exclusively composed of legal rules,while the latter adds legal principles and political ethics therein.The positivism argues for the unity of dual legal rules,confirming the discretion from the perspective of judge-made law.While the school of new natural law represented by Dworkin argues that besides legal rules,constitutes of law include principles and political ethics,and discretion by judges should be within the limit of legal rules,or else resulting in arbitrariness and injustice.Such controversy aim to argue that which law can accomplish to the maximum people’s pursuit of fairness,justice and order,in other words,which is an effective system of law to eliminate ruling by persons and realize the ruling of good law.