指导性案例的实践功能与角色定位

The Functions in Practice and Role Localization of the Guiding Cases

我国指导性案例的效力经历的是由柔性到刚性转变的渐进过程,但人们却并未就其规制司法裁判的约束效力取得相同的理解和一致的认可。对此,人们可以制定出多种关于案例指导制度实践功能的描述性设计和规划,每种设想都有与之相对应的效力定位。但作为非正式的法律渊源,指导性案例的最终归宿必定是回应当下的司法现实,只有将其映射到社会生活当中,才能真正探究其制度运作的实践功能所在。其实,指导性案例的角色定位不当反映出理性与权威之间存在的悖论,与其将指导性案例的裁判理由和裁判要旨强加于人,不如充分发挥其理性说服的意蕴和效用,力求引导人们就诸多问题达成共识。

The effect of Chinese case - guiding system has gone through a gradual process from flexibility to rigidi- ty, but people havent reached an agreement on its binding effect of ruling the trial. People can formulate various descriptive designs of case- guiding systemg practice effect to avoid this, every design has its own localization of the effect. However, as informal source of law, the destination of guiding case must reflect the current judicial real- ity. Only iT reflects the civil life, can we really explore the practice effect of the operation of the system. In fact, the improper positioning of guiding case reflects the paradox between reason and authority, and we should give full play to its meaning and utility of rational persuasion, in order to make people reach more agreements on many differences, rather than foist the reason of judgment and the the referee essence upon others.