本文選題：司法裁決 + 后果主義　； 參考：《吉林大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：本文從轟動(dòng)一時(shí)的“許霆案”談起,“許霆案”二審法院將一審判決的無(wú)期徒刑改判為有期徒刑五年,表象上這是兩審法院司法技術(shù)與司法風(fēng)格的迥異,而實(shí)質(zhì)上則是司法裁決價(jià)值取向的深層律動(dòng),“許霆案”是司法裁決后果主義范式的一個(gè)典型。本文在界定后果主義涵義的基礎(chǔ)上,對(duì)“身份關(guān)系”語(yǔ)境下的“后果主義價(jià)值取向”與中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)法律文化的融合進(jìn)行歷史的反思,并對(duì)后果主義價(jià)值取向在當(dāng)代社會(huì)司法實(shí)踐中的作用進(jìn)行實(shí)證分析。 本文采取比較分析和實(shí)證分析的方法得出結(jié)論,要想突破傳統(tǒng)后果主義的困境,就要同時(shí)實(shí)現(xiàn)司法裁決的“技術(shù)性”與“倫理性”訴求,達(dá)到法律效果與社會(huì)效果的良性互動(dòng),即實(shí)現(xiàn)審慎的后果主義價(jià)值取向,進(jìn)而在當(dāng)代中國(guó)民生關(guān)懷的背景下,以后果主義價(jià)值取向?yàn)橐暯?對(duì)現(xiàn)有的司法功能進(jìn)行反思。 本文共分為七個(gè)部分： 第一部分為引言,主要對(duì)司法裁決的后果主義價(jià)值取向進(jìn)行總體上的概述,提出本文的寫(xiě)作背景和學(xué)術(shù)意義。 第二部分,后果主義的基本理論研究。首先,對(duì)后果主義的范疇界定進(jìn)行了闡述,將后果主義視為功利主義的量化與現(xiàn)實(shí)化,將行為后果作為衡量行為在道德、倫理上善惡的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。其次,對(duì)司法裁決價(jià)值取向進(jìn)行后果主義解析,后果主義價(jià)值取向是司法裁決邁向回應(yīng)型法的積極訴求,因此,司法裁決的后果主義價(jià)值取向并非存在是非之別,只有適度之分。 第三部分,對(duì)“身份關(guān)系”語(yǔ)境下的后果主義價(jià)值取向進(jìn)行歷史的反思。西方社會(huì)和中國(guó)古代社會(huì)有著不同的文明發(fā)展路徑,在西方社會(huì)漸漸走向信仰法治道路的同時(shí),儒家學(xué)說(shuō)在中國(guó)封建社會(huì)中依然占據(jù)著主要地位,中國(guó)傳統(tǒng)的正義觀是當(dāng)代司法裁決后果主義價(jià)值取向的歷史文化基礎(chǔ)。 第四部分,對(duì)中國(guó)司法裁決價(jià)值取向進(jìn)行實(shí)證分析。以基層法院為考量對(duì)象來(lái)探求中國(guó)當(dāng)代社會(huì)司法裁決的價(jià)值取向,并得出結(jié)論“中國(guó)基層法院司法裁決采取后果主義價(jià)值取向。”然而,單純的以司法裁決在社會(huì)上引發(fā)的后果作為評(píng)價(jià)判決是否公平正義的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),會(huì)導(dǎo)致后果主義價(jià)值取向陷入困境。 第五部分,尋求司法裁決的“技術(shù)性”與“倫理性”之間的契合,實(shí)現(xiàn)審慎的后果主義價(jià)值取向。要想突破后果主義的中國(guó)困境,就應(yīng)提出關(guān)于程序正義和后果主義的適用于所有現(xiàn)代文明社會(huì)的最低限度要求,尋求判決的技術(shù)性和倫理性之間的契合,在法律之內(nèi)尋求社會(huì)效果,即實(shí)現(xiàn)審慎的后果主義價(jià)值取向。 第六部分,以審慎的后果主義價(jià)值取向?yàn)橐暯?對(duì)現(xiàn)有的司法功能進(jìn)行反思。在后果主義價(jià)值取向視角下對(duì)司法功能進(jìn)行反思,致力于發(fā)展回應(yīng)型法,使判決的法律效果和社會(huì)效果得到統(tǒng)一,真正發(fā)揮司法維護(hù)社會(huì)秩序和促進(jìn)社會(huì)和諧的作用。 第七部分為結(jié)論。司法裁決并非都要體現(xiàn)后果主義價(jià)值取向,僅有在疑難案件中,將后果(社會(huì)效果)提前介入裁決進(jìn)程才具有必要性。
[Abstract]:On the basis of defining the meaning of consequence , this article reflects the historical reflection on the " consequence value orientation " in the context of " identity relation " and the integration of traditional Chinese legal culture , and makes an empirical analysis on the role of consequence doctrine value orientation in contemporary social justice practice .


Based on the comparative analysis and the empirical analysis , this paper concludes that to break through the dilemma of traditional sequentialism , it is necessary to realize the " technical " and " ethical " demands of judicial decision at the same time , to achieve the benign interaction between legal effect and social effect , that is , to realize the value orientation of prudent consequence doctrine , and to reflect on the existing judicial function in the context of contemporary China ' s livelihood concern .


This article is divided into seven parts :


The first part is divided into three parts : introduction , the general overview of the value orientation of the consequences of judicial decisions , and puts forward the background and academic significance of this article .


The second part , the basic theoretical study of the sequentialism . First , the definition of the category of consequence doctrine is expounded , and the consequence doctrine is regarded as the quantification and reality of the utility , and the consequence of the behavior is regarded as the criterion of the moral and ethical good and evil . Secondly , the value orientation of the judicial decision is analyzed , and the consequence doctrine value orientation is the positive appeal of the judicial decision to the response type law . Therefore , the value orientation of the consequence doctrine of judicial decision is not the right or wrong , only modest .


The third part reflects the historical reflection of the consequence doctrine value orientation in the context of " identity relation " . The western society and the Chinese ancient society have different civilizations development path . At the same time , the Confucian doctrine still occupies the dominant position in the feudal society in China . The traditional view of justice in China is the historical and cultural basis of the value orientation of the consequence of contemporary judicial decision .


In the fourth part , an empirical analysis of the value orientation of Chinese judicial decisions is carried out . The value orientation of Chinese contemporary social justice decisions is determined by the grass - roots courts , and the conclusion is that the judicial decisions of the Chinese grass - roots courts are oriented .


The fifth part , seeking judicial decision " technical " and " ethical " , realizes the prudent consequence doctrine value orientation . To break through the Chinese predicament of sequentialism , we should put forward the minimum requirement of procedural justice and sequentialism applicable to all modern civil society , and seek social effect within the law , that is , to realize the value orientation of prudence .


The sixth part , based on the value orientation of the prudent consequence , reflects on the existing judicial function . In the view of the value orientation of the consequence , the judicial function is reflected , and it is devoted to the development of the response method . The legal effect and the social effect of the judgement are unified . The function of the judicial maintenance of social order and the promotion of social harmony is truly exerted .


In the seventh part , the conclusion is that judicial decisions do not reflect the value orientation of consequence doctrine , only in difficult cases , it is necessary to intervene in the decision process ahead of consequence ( social effect ) .

【學(xué)位授予單位】：吉林大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 焦冶;;罔密而奸不塞,刑蕃而民愈Z凇泄糯ㄍ餿ㄋ枷肟賈J];當(dāng)代法學(xué);2008年06期

2 趙旭東;程序正義概念與標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的再認(rèn)識(shí)[J];法律科學(xué).西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2003年06期

3 楊知文;;司法裁決的后果主義論證[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào));2009年03期

4 鄭成良,陳海光;論法官職業(yè)思維方式的養(yǎng)成[J];法律適用(國(guó)家法官學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2002年12期

5 孔祥俊;論法律效果與社會(huì)效果的統(tǒng)一 一項(xiàng)基本司法政策的法理分析[J];法律適用;2005年01期

6 江必新;;社會(huì)主義司法基本價(jià)值初探[J];法律適用;2009年12期

7 陳金釗;;法律解釋的藝術(shù)——一種微觀的法治實(shí)現(xiàn)方法[J];法商研究;2009年05期

8 蘇力;當(dāng)代中國(guó)法律中的習(xí)慣——一個(gè)制定法的透視[J];法學(xué)評(píng)論;2001年03期

9 高慧;王淵;;許霆案:司法獨(dú)立下裁判的法律效果與社會(huì)效果[J];法制與社會(huì);2008年11期

10 賀小榮;;司法判決與社會(huì)認(rèn)同[J];法制資訊;2008年04期

，

本文編號(hào)：1773078