论裁判后果主义推理的运作原理

The Operational Principle of Consequentialist Reasoning

与传统法律推理不同,后果主义推理是根据对裁判后果的预测和评价来选择判决理由。这种对后果的评价在本质上是一种价值判断,必须借助于一定的评价标准,才能在事后对其加以控制及合理化。基于后果评价的内容和理由的不同,可以将评价标准划分为规则价值和后果价值。一方面,无论是法律中体现的价值,还是法律本身所追求的价值,它们都可以蕴含在依法裁判的目标之中,从而表现为法的安定性、融贯性等一般标准。另一方面,一些标准还可能源于道德考量、社情民意和社会治理等方面的需求,它们既可以作为"超越法律"的实质理由,又构成了对"恣意裁判"的外在限制。此外,裁判结论的得出还需要经过证立和说明,只有建立在相关论证程序的制约和保障之上,后果主义推理才不会使司法裁判脱离法律的轨道。

Different from the traditional legal reasoning, consequentialist reasoning chooses the reasons for judgment based on the prediction and evaluation of the consequences of judgment. This evaluation of the consequences is essentially a kind of value judgment, which must be controlled and rationalized afterwards by means of certain evaluation criteria. Based on the different contents and reasons of the consequential evaluation, the evaluation criteria can be divided into the rule value and the consequence value. On the one hand, whether it is the value reflected in law or the value pursued by law itself, they can be embodied in the goal of adjudication under law, then characterized by the general criteria of legal certainty and coherence. On the other hand, some criteria may also be derived from the requirements of moral considerations, social conditions, public opinions and social governance, which can be used as substantial reasons for "overcoming law" and constitute the external restrictions on "arbitrary judgment". Furthermore,the conclusion of the judgment needs to be verified and explained. Only on the basis of the constraints and guarantees of the relevant argumentation procedures, will consequentialist reasoning not make judicial decision deviate from the track of law.