“私人执法”是否存在——与徐昕教授商榷

Is There“Private Enforcement of Law”?

《法律的私人执行》(以下简称《执行》)一文在《法学研究》上发表以后,引起了广泛的关注。当时徐昕教授所提出的"私人执法"的概念与其运用的历史分析方法和法经济学分析方法给我们带来了启发。但是为何私人能够执法?以及"私人执法"这个概念能否成立?法社会学或者法制史研究的实证主义(legal positivism)进路单独无法回答这些问题。在日常生活中,"私力救济"现象固然存在,然而这种救济在多大程度上可命名为"私人执法"更是一个法学理论的问题。社会中的"私力救济"现象若要转化为"私人执法"的法律概念必须面对科学性、合法性、有效性等问题。换言之,法理学中能否科学地推导出"私人执法",在实证分析的基础上,必须同时进行规范的法理学研究。通过分析不难发现,私人执法的概念中蕴含着巨大的、不可调和的矛盾问题。

After Private Enforcement of Law( hereinafter referred to as the'enforcement') was published in China Law, it attracted wide attention. The historical and economic analysis of law which Professor Xu Xin used in this article brings us inspiration. But what is law enforcement? And why can there be private enforcement? Sociology of Law and Legal History Research positivist approach alone cannot answer these questions. These'justice privée'cases do exist,but it's still a problem in how to name it with scientific legal concept. This is a basic problem involved in legal positivism- legal concepts and disciplines. If'justice privée'in society phenomenon is to transfer into'private law enforcement',we must face the scientific, legitimate and effectiveness study of the concept and other issues. In other words,Chinese and Western Jurisprudence's inclusiveness of'private enforcement of law', on the basis of empirical analysis,must face jurisprudential normative research at the same time. And through this analysis,we found that the concept of private enforcement of law contains huge, irreconcilable contradictions.