论文部分内容阅读
在美国宪政语境下,能动主义的司法哲学要求法官超越法律的文本含义解释法律,以满足公民不断产生的权利诉求和适应社会转型的现实,但是,美国宪政结构中的固有悖论使美国司法哲学处于民主与法治二律背反的宪政困境中,很难简单评判司法能动和司法克制孰优孰劣。在中国语境下,传统的法律文化为实行司法能动提供充分的文化土壤,中国现有的法律解释体制具备实行司法能动主义的制度条件。目前,中国社会转型的现实国情也必然要求地方法院积极进行司法创新,探索能动主义的地方司法模式。因此,选择何种司法方式应从具体的实践逻辑出发探讨其功能正当性,而非从某个概念或理论出发探讨其逻辑应然性。
In the constitutional context of the United States, the activist jurisprudence requires that judges interpret the law beyond the legal meaning of the text in order to meet the citizens’ constant demands for rights and to adapt to the reality of social transformation. However, the inherent paradox in the constitutional structure of the United States makes the judiciary in the United States In the constitutional predicament where democracy and the rule of law are contradictory, it is hard to simply judge the merits of judicial motivation and judicial restraint. Under the Chinese context, the traditional legal culture provides ample cultural soil for judicial action. The existing legal interpretation system in China possesses the institutional conditions for implementing judicial activism. At present, the actual conditions of China’s social transition also inevitably require local courts to actively carry out judicial innovation and explore the local justice model of the activism. Therefore, what kind of judicatory should be chosen should explore its functional legitimacy from the concrete practical logic, instead of exploring its logical necessity from a certain concept or theory.