紧急状态中民族习惯法的“出场”与“调适”——基于风险社会学与系统论的质性研究

The“Entrance”and“Adjustion”of Ethnic Customary Law in the State of Emergency——An Empirical Observation Based on Risk Sociology and System Theory of Luhmman

"风险社会学"的要旨"选择即风险",这恰恰是"现代社会"必须面对的问题。通过风险社会学的角度审视"新冠疫情"防控,既能够明确区分"风险分配主体"和"风险化约主体"的权责问题,更能够以一种"系统论"的逻辑指出在"行政法治"这一异常表述下法律和政治面对的根本"吊诡",这表现为"行政止于建议"和"暴力执法的认定"上的模糊,进而反映出了"紧急权力"和"公民权利"之间的张力。通过对实证资料的整理和分析,一种以"民间习惯法"的介入来转移上述张力的方案的"可接受性"得以证明,但是从风险社会学角度看,"民间习惯法"的"出场"则意味着"风险"和"吊诡"的再制,因此对于这种"出场",又必须通过中国语境下的"政法传统"对其进行"政治"和"法律"意义上的规范。

The essence of“risk sociology”is that“choice is risk”,which is exactly the problem that“modern society”must face.Viewing the control and prevention of COVID-19 epidemic from the perspective of risk sociology,can the problem of powers and responsibilities of“subject of risk allocation”and“subject of risk reduction”be clarified,and even can the fundamental“paradox”faced by the law and politics under an abnormal expression of“rule of administrative law”be pointed out in a kind of“system theory”logic,these are manifested as“the administration can only give suggestions”and the obscure on“the confirmation of oppressive conducts”,which further reflect the tension between the“emergency power”and the“civil rights”.Based on the collection and analysis of the empirical data,the“acceptability”of a kind of solution that letting“ethnic customary law”to intervene and transfer the tension is proved,but from the perspective of risk sociology,the“entrance”of“ethnic customary law”means reproductions of“risks”and“paradox”.So for this kind of“entrance”,it must be regulated in the sense of“politics”and“law”through the“tradition of politics and law”under China’s context.