法律约束、个案正义与司法论证——对自由法学的另一种解读

19 世纪末的自由法学认为,实在法是存有漏洞的,法官的任务便是进行漏洞填补。为解决法官"法律约束"与"个案正义"难题,自由法学将法官裁判区别为"主观动机"与"客观论证"结构,并将法律约束置于"客观论证"层面,通过公开论理使暗含在判决中的法官"主观动机"以客观化的方式展示出来。对此,纯粹法学通过法位阶秩序理论予以批判,然该批判误解了自由法学的理论诉求,同时也就无法洞悉司法过程的真实状态。

At the end of 19th century, supporte were loopholes existed in order to solve the tension case＂, judgments ＂subjective motive made positive law, and judges＇ role, rs of thus, between ＂legal restraint＂ imposed by the judg ＂objective subjective motive＂ e had been distinguishe reasoning＂. of the judge With legal implied in revealed in an objective way through open reasoning process. by relying on the theory of hierarchy of legal norms. Howev theoretical arguments upheld by free law school, and accord clearly the actual status of judicial process. on di free law school argued that there was to fill up those loopholes. In judge and ＂justice for individual nto two types by free law school： restraint being subject to ＂ objective the decision-making process could be The pure theory of law criticized this er, their criticism misunderstood the ingly, was not in a position to know