在“规范拘束”与“个案正义”之间——论法教义学视野下的价值判断

Between the Norm Constraint and Justice of Individual Case:On Value Judgment under the Perspective of Legal Dogmatics

在概念法学的乌托邦被破除之后,法官如何做到既受"规范拘束"又能兼顾"个案正义",一直以来成了法学方法论上的一个难解之谜。疑难案件的频发和社科法学的异军突起,使得法教义学陷入了一种十分尴尬的境地。由于"依法裁判论"和"自由裁量论"两种对待疑难案件的极端裁判理论,均未能成功地回答法官在落实疑难个案中的正义时又如何能受到规范的拘束,以价值判断为核心综合平衡论应运而生,通过遵循形式规则、融贯性和最小损害原则,它可以达到捍卫疑难案件裁判中法律属性的基本立场,同时又可以最大限度地确保司法判决的确定性。

After the conceptual jurisprudence has been got rid of, how can judges well receive ＂norm constraint＂ while maintain ＂justice of individual case＂, has been an enigma of methodology of law. Frequent emergence of hard case and rising of social le- gal science, has made legal dogmatics caught in an embarrassing situation. Meanwhile, due to these two extreme judicial theories of ＂adjudication according to law＂ and ＂Discretion＂, fail to respond the proposition of how could judges be bound by legal norms when they pursue justice of individual case. Value judgment based on the theory of comprehensive balance emerges at the right moment, it can defend the legal attribute in adjudication of hard cases by following formal rules, coherence and the principle of minimal damage, while it can also ensure furthest the certainty of judicial adjudication.