论法律解释学视角内外的确定性命题

On Judiciary Determinacy in Law Explanation

自德沃金以降的理论方向代表了在法律解释学的向度内建构法律确定性命题的一种极致努力。但当我们把目光重新拉回到中国时,却又可以明显感受到法律解释论路向的限度,原因就在于我国法院判决所缺失的重要维度:权威性与终局性。在判决之终局性成为疑问的背景下,法院在实践操作中不再拘泥于法律解释论上立场的精确阐释,而是侧重于引导当事人达成纠纷解决之合意。在这个过程中,法律确定性命题已经不知不觉地被置换成了裁判的可接受性问题。这一基本事实足以促成我们进行理论视角的转换:由法律的解释论转向法律的商谈论。

Ever since Dworkin, it is a hard work on how to construct judiciary determinacy in the field of law explana- tion. However, while reflection on the situation of China, the limitation of this route may be felt, because the authority and finality of the courts＇judgment are not certain. Under this background, the courts in practice no longer insist on the precise explanation of rules, but emphasizing on how to make agreement between the concerning parties. In the process, issues concerning the determinacy of law explanation have been replaced with acceptance of judgment, all of which are sufficient to make a change from the law explanation to legal discourse.