本文選題：自由裁量權(quán)　切入點(diǎn)：司法正義　出處：《遼寧師范大學(xué)》2012年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：無(wú)論是在客觀現(xiàn)實(shí)中或是在法學(xué)研究中，作為司法權(quán)的重要組成部分，法官自由裁量權(quán)都是值得共同關(guān)注的問(wèn)題，在司法實(shí)踐中，法官的自由裁量權(quán)是司法權(quán)行使的基本內(nèi)容，并會(huì)影響到法律適用的最終結(jié)果。法官自由裁量權(quán)的行使正確與否關(guān)系到能否在司法實(shí)踐中實(shí)現(xiàn)個(gè)案正義、并進(jìn)一步實(shí)現(xiàn)法律正義，以及能否合理地解決法律漏洞所引起不確定性等等一系列問(wèn)題。目前中國(guó)的司法制度改革依然在進(jìn)行中，如何在現(xiàn)有的司法環(huán)境中合乎理性的規(guī)范限制法官的自由裁量權(quán)是一個(gè)無(wú)法回避并具有現(xiàn)實(shí)意義的問(wèn)題。本文試就這一問(wèn)題展開(kāi)理論研究，將有關(guān)法官自由裁量權(quán)的一般理論與我國(guó)當(dāng)下的司法現(xiàn)實(shí)狀況相結(jié)合，重點(diǎn)研究我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中面臨的如何合理規(guī)制法官自由裁量權(quán)的問(wèn)題，希望能夠引起相關(guān)學(xué)者進(jìn)一步的深入探討。文章除引言和結(jié)語(yǔ)部分，正文分成四個(gè)部分。 第一部分是對(duì)法官自由裁量權(quán)的概述。在這一部分中，筆者考察比較了國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者提出的自由裁量權(quán)定義，分析了不同學(xué)派對(duì)法官自由裁量權(quán)的理論主張，重點(diǎn)解析了哈特和德沃金的爭(zhēng)論 第二部分對(duì)法官自由裁量權(quán)的發(fā)展脈絡(luò)進(jìn)行了梳理，分別介紹了英美法系國(guó)家、大陸法系國(guó)家以及中國(guó)的法官自由裁量權(quán)的歷史發(fā)展，力圖通過(guò)不同法系法律文化背景的分析和相互比較，尋找出可以借鑒的合理規(guī)范法官自由裁量權(quán)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。 第三部分主要總結(jié)了法官自由裁量權(quán)的必要性及基本功能。介紹了由于法律的局限性造成的三個(gè)矛盾致使法官自由裁量權(quán)的客觀存在，，并在此基礎(chǔ)上，從有利于實(shí)現(xiàn)一般正義與個(gè)別正義的平衡，協(xié)調(diào)程序正義與實(shí)體正義的沖突，實(shí)現(xiàn)正義與效率的最大化三個(gè)方面論述了法官自由裁量權(quán)存在的基本功能。 第四部分是對(duì)如何合理規(guī)范我國(guó)法官自由裁量權(quán)提出了幾點(diǎn)構(gòu)想，首先總結(jié)了我國(guó)司法實(shí)踐中，法官自由裁量權(quán)存在的一些問(wèn)題。然后，提出四點(diǎn)構(gòu)想：從人的角度是要推進(jìn)法官職業(yè)化進(jìn)程，從環(huán)境的角度是要切實(shí)保障司法獨(dú)立性，并重點(diǎn)論述如何通過(guò)實(shí)際運(yùn)用中的案例指導(dǎo)制度以及加強(qiáng)判決書(shū)的說(shuō)理內(nèi)容等進(jìn)一步規(guī)范法官的自由裁量權(quán)。
[Abstract]:As an important part of judicial power, the discretion of judges is a problem worthy of common concern in both objective reality and legal research. In judicial practice, the discretion of judges is the basic content of the exercise of judicial power. And it will affect the final result of the application of the law. Whether the judge's discretion is right or not is related to whether the case justice can be realized in the judicial practice and the further realization of the legal justice. And whether we can reasonably solve the uncertainty caused by the loopholes in the law, and so on. At present, the reform of China's judicial system is still in progress. How to restrict the judge's discretion in the current judicial environment according to rational norms is an unavoidable and practical problem. This paper tries to carry out a theoretical study on this issue. Combining the general theory of the judge's discretion with the current judicial reality in our country, the author focuses on how to regulate the judge's discretion reasonably in the judicial practice of our country. The article is divided into four parts except introduction and conclusion. The first part is an overview of the discretion of judges. In this part, the author investigates and compares the definitions of discretion put forward by scholars at home and abroad, and analyzes the theoretical opinions of different schools on the discretion of judges. This paper focuses on the analysis of the debate between Hart and Dworkin. In the second part, the author sorts out the development of the judge's discretion, and introduces the historical development of the judge's discretion in the common law countries, the civil law countries and China. Through the analysis and comparison of the legal cultural backgrounds of different legal systems, the author tries to find out the reasonable experience of regulating the discretion of judges. The third part mainly summarizes the necessity and basic function of the judge's discretion, and introduces the objective existence of the judge's discretion caused by the three contradictions caused by the limitation of law, and on this basis, This paper discusses the basic functions of the existence of the judge's discretion from three aspects: the balance between general justice and individual justice, the coordination of the conflict between procedural justice and substantive justice, and the maximization of justice and efficiency. Part 4th puts forward some ideas on how to reasonably regulate the discretion of judges in our country. Firstly, it summarizes some problems existing in the judicial practice of our country. Four ideas are put forward: from the human point of view, we should promote the professionalization of judges, and from the environmental point of view, we should ensure the independence of the judiciary. It also discusses how to further standardize the judge's discretion through the practical application of the case guidance system and the strengthening of the reasoning content of the judgment.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：D926.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 潘華仿 ,高鴻鈞 ,賀衛(wèi)方;當(dāng)代西方兩大法系主要法律淵源比較研究[J];比較法研究;1987年03期

2 帥巧芳,婁正前;社會(huì)認(rèn)同度:法官自由裁量權(quán)限的標(biāo)尺[J];法律適用;2003年11期

3 舒洪水;;建立我國(guó)案例指導(dǎo)制度的困境和出路——以刑事案例為例[J];法學(xué)雜志;2012年01期

4 夏錦文;吳春峰;;法官在判例指導(dǎo)制度中的需求[J];法學(xué);2010年08期

5 王利明;;我國(guó)案例指導(dǎo)制度若干問(wèn)題研究[J];法學(xué);2012年01期

6 ;最高人民法院關(guān)于印發(fā)《人民法院五年改革綱要》的通知[J];中華人民共和國(guó)最高人民法院公報(bào);1999年06期

7 朱道華;;論我國(guó)法官自由裁量權(quán)保障與制約機(jī)制的完善[J];貴州警官職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(公安法治研究);2006年04期

8 吳敦;;規(guī)范法官自由裁量權(quán)問(wèn)題研究[J];法律適用;2009年05期

9 宋曉;;判例生成與中國(guó)案例指導(dǎo)制度[J];法學(xué)研究;2011年04期

10 陳金釗;;德沃金法官的法律解釋——評(píng)《法律帝國(guó)》一書(shū)中關(guān)于法律的認(rèn)識(shí)[J];南京大學(xué)法律評(píng)論;1997年01期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 李奕;法官自由裁量權(quán)論[D];吉林大學(xué);2005年

2 李巖峰;法官自由裁量權(quán)論[D];中國(guó)政法大學(xué);2007年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 蔣潔;德沃金的司法裁判理論解讀[D];南京師范大學(xué);2005年

本文編號(hào)：1614927