正当裁判对依法裁判的超越与融贯

Transcendence and Coherence of Justified Judgement to Legitimacy Judgement

法官对一般案件负有“依法裁判”的义务,对疑难案件需要作出建立在政治道德共识基础上的“正当裁判”。在疑难案件中,除非将法官的裁判结论等同于“什么是法律”,否则无论法官“越法裁判”进行自由裁量,还是依靠法律解释,都超越了法教义学标准中的法律在进行正当裁判。正当裁判之所以能超越依法裁判,是因为两者本质融贯,即司法裁判的本质目标就是正当裁判,依法裁判是实现正当裁判不可或缺的手段。法的安定性有助于呈现这一融贯关系。依法裁判能充分实现法的安定性,因为大部分时候法官正是通过依法裁判维系一个在政治道德上相对合理可靠的社会秩序。在绝大多数情况下,法官的依法裁判正是建立在正当裁判的前提之上。

In general,judges have the duty to adjudicate according to law,yet in hard cases,they need to adjudicate justly based on the consensus of political morality.In hard cases,unless judges' decisions are amounted to “what is law”,otherwise whether they deploy judicial discretion or rely upon legal interpretation,they indeed go beyond legal doctrines and adjudicate justly.Judges can adjudicate justly beyond the boundary of law since these two ways of adjudication are coherent with each other:the goal of adjudication is to make justified decisions,while adjudicating according to law indispensably facilitates that goal.The idea of legal certainty can help illustrate the coherence aforementioned:the biggest merit of adjudicating according to law is for legal certainty,and the reason that adjudicating according to law satisfies legal certainty is that most of the time judges are maintaining a reasonable political society by virtue of following the law.That is to say,normally judges already adjudicate justly by adjudicating according to law.