【作者】 张晓萍；

【导师】 谢晖；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 法学理论， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 “民间法”术语的产生乃是基于“法律多元主义”的立场,即在法律体系中,不仅包括国家法,还包括与国家法并存且一起起作用的其他法律,民间法即在其中。既然民间法活生生地存在着,那么它势必要走向司法,在司法实践中争取它的话语权,因此有关民间法司法运用问题就摆在了我们面前,成为我们不得不予以回答的问题。基于此种关怀,本文进行了相应的研究,分设六章,前两章着重分析民间法司法运用的价值及其理论基础,接下来的三章分别从实体、程序、方法角度研究民间法司法运用的具体问题,最后一章探讨应当加强的制度建设。第一章：挖掘民间法司法运用的价值。将民间法引入司法审判,首先面临的一个前提性的问题是对民间法司法运用的价值进行论证。司法的场域运行表明民间法在司法中强有力的存在,与此同时,由于和谐社会命题的提出以及对司法解决纠纷功能的重视,民间法司法运用的价值不是被夸大了,而是还没有得到充分的挖掘。具体而言,民间法司法运用的价值体现在：第一,它有利于规范法官的自由裁量权。民间法以其相对客观的存在,为法官在行使自由裁量权时提供了一种外在的标准,一定程度地构成了对法官自由裁量权的限制；第二,它有利于实现案结事了,推进和谐司法,促进社会和谐；第三,它有利于司法活动顺应主体社会生活的权利要求,维护法律的权威；第四,它有利于实现有效的社会治理,达致善治。第二章：阐明民间法司法运用的理论基础。文章指出,政治国家与市民社会的良性架构、大传统与小传统的理性沟通、形式正义与实质正义的动态平衡、法律教义学有效性与社会学有效性的适度兼容,为民间法的司法运用提供了理论支持。市民社会是法治运行、发展的社会根基,我们必须努力促进多元利益主体、公共领域、民间社会组织和社会自治的良性发展,与之相应,应当给予在民间社会组织内所形成的“成文化的自主性规则”以特别的重视与关注,这些规则有相当一部分是民间法的重要组成部分,在司法实践中构成了法律的主要来源之一。与此同时,也应看到,由于乡土社会处于蜕变、市民社会尚处于培育中,所以中国法文化中的传统“本土资源”还可有条件地加以利用,那些散落在民间的传统资源因其自身的实用性质以及对特殊利益的灵活保护而仍然具有价值；在中国法治建设与发展的过程中,大、小传统的断裂使得国家在社会中陷入了合法性危机,因此需要建立某种机制以有效地沟通大、小传统,化解精英话语与大众话语之间的紧张态势,这就要求在法律的制定与适用时注重利用民间的智识资源,注重大众话语所具有的合理机能,与严格地局限于国家制定法的藩篱相对应,承载着民间智识与大众话语的民间法理应是法律适用者所要考虑的因素之一；在法治的建设与发展过程中,还需要在形式正义与实质正义之间建立动态平衡机制,一方面避免因形式正义的过分统治致使法治成为压制,另一方面避免因实质正义的过分统治致使法治消解在自身的无序之中。因此,法官在对类似情况进行类似处理的过程中,需要对不同情况加以不同对待,需要考虑个案所处的具体环境,需要在关注法律逻辑的同时对生活逻辑给予应有的理解与同情,一定程度地允许用特殊的衡平手段来纠正国家法律,如此一来,民间法进入司法便成为可能；此外,在法的实际运作过程中,还需要兼容法律教义学有效性与社会学有效性,适度地援引民间法,从而避免因过分偏执于国家法而造成法的有效性之不足。第三章：揭示民间法的法源地位。从司法立场而言,以历史眼光观之,虽然在理性强音的推动下,西方法典编纂运动兴起,但是在司法实践中并非完全否定了民间法的法源地位。在中国传统司法中,民间法作为法源更多地是与其他法源混合适用,并且很难以正式渊源或非正式渊源来予以界定。在当今之中国,民间法的法源地位发生了内部分化：在刑法、行政法等领域,如果关涉到对公民权利的限制或剥夺的,则应排除民间法的法源地位,而为了消解制定法的僵硬性,能够建立新的合法化事由的民间法则是允许的；在民法、商法等领域,民间法至少具有次位法源地位,在某些特殊情况下,民间法的法源地位也可以优先于国家制定法。从法治发展及其宪制化过程来看,成文化的民间法是法律的正式渊源,而习惯法和准成文的民间法是法律的非正式渊源。尽管基于司法立场的法律渊源理论为法官法源提供了大致的方向,也一般性地规定了民间法的法源地位,然而,民间法在司法实践中具体境遇时有差异,一定程度地说明了法律渊源理论只能以静态的方式为民间法司法运用提供实体上的支持。第四章：探讨民间法进入司法的途径与识别。在我国司法实践中,民间法进入司法主要通过以下几种途径,即立法认可、司法解释、最高法院发布的意见、地方法院制定的指导意见、典型案例指导、法官自由裁量权的运用等。尽管民间法进入司法的途径有多种,但是民间法的运用并非一路坦途。在法律渊源理论中,民间法的存在是一个确定性的概念,然而在司法实践中民间法是否存在就不是一个十分确定的事情,其自身所具有的局限性使得民间法的识别成为必要。民间法的识别是当事人对民间法的证明以及法官对民间法的确认,其包括识别的标准即民间法应当具有实效、合法、良法之品质,识别的程序即启动、举证与确认。民间法的识别体现了民间法司法运用的动态特征,它为民间法司法运用提供了程序上的支持。需要指出的是,法律渊源理论为民间法司法运用提供了一种实体意义上的可能,民间法的识别为民间法司法运用提供了具有可操作性的程序保障,而两者皆为民间法与法律方法的勾连提供了必要的支持。如果没有法律渊源理论,那么民间法进入司法进而成为个别规范的来源即失去基础；如果没有民间法的识别,即经过当事人的举证与法官的确认,那么民间法司法运用也就难以实现从可能到现实的转化。只有在实体上可能、程序上支持的情况下,才使得民间法与法律方法的勾连问题得以拓展开来。第五章：着重于民间法与法律方法的可能勾连。在司法裁判过程中存在着复杂的建构性活动,即法官建构了大小前提,正是在法官对大小前提的构建过程中,民间法与法律方法的勾连成为一种可能,从而为民间法司法运用提供了方法上的支持。民间法司法运用的方法具体体现在：第一,法律发现在一定程度上体现了法官需要适当地发挥主观能动性,在法律渊源中找到适合本案的恰当规则,因此作为法律渊源之一的民间法成为法律发现的场所之一,并通过法律发现进入司法；第二,在法律适用的过程中,法律解释是不可避免的,然而它也不是机械地囿于制定法,在适度开放的解释策略之下,民间法作为法律的解释源得以进入司法；第三,法律自制定以来即以其自身存在漏洞为特征,所以需要相应的补救方法,利益衡量即在其中。通常来讲,“结论的可接受程度之大小”构成了评价利益衡量的正当与否的基础。由于在对冲突利益的评判方面,民间法往往体现了民众的立场与价值取向,反映了民众的心理,所以在利益衡量中注重运用民间法,案件结果容易得到民众的认可,裁判的可接受程度也会大大地增加,民间法通过利益衡量补充法律漏洞从而进入司法；第四,案件事实的确认首先需要理解生活事实的法律意义,然后再就生活事实是否存在展开证明,一般而言,证明方法有两种,即通过证据证明案件事实的存在和根据经验法则或逻辑思维推断出案件事实的存在。由于民间法自身蕴含着经验法则之内容,因此民间法有可能成为案件事实的确认依据从而进入司法；第五,对于法官来说,对裁判结果进行论证并说服当事人予以接受,是其职责所在。当事人之所以能够接受,不在于外在的强力,而是在于内心的认同,在于裁判理由与人情事理相通。因此,如果法官适度地援引民间法作为论证的理由,无疑会增加论证的可接受性,促使当事人对判决更加心服口服,也正如此,民间法作为法律论证的理由进入司法。第六章：阐明民间法司法运用所需要加强的制度建设。在我国司法实践中有关民间法运用存在着一些问题,针对这些问题需要加强相关的制度建设,主要包括立法应进一步明确民间法的法源地位并加强民间法司法运用的程序建设,建立健全案例指导制度,建立健全多元化纠纷解决机制,加强民间法的规范化整理并建立健全司法审查机制。更多还原

【Abstract】 The generation of folk law is based upon the position of legal pluralism, that is, the legal system includes not only national law but also other laws in which there is folk law. Since it exists, folk law must be into justice and fight for the right of discourse in judicial practice. Therefore, the question about judicial application of folk law is placed before us, which we should answer to. This paper carried out the corresponding studies, and it is divided into six chapters. The first two chapters are on the value and the theoretical foundation of judicial application of folk law. The following three chapters respectively study specific issues of judicial application of folk law from the angle of entity, procedure and method. The last chapter is on system construction about judicial application of folk lawChapter 1 is on the value of judicial application of folk law. When we introduce folk law into justice, the first problem we face is the demonstration about the value of judicial application of folk law. Judicial field operation shows that folk law strongly exists in justice. Meanwhile, because we put forward the proposition of the harmonious society and attach important to the functions of justice that settles disputes, the value of judicial application of folk law is not exaggerated, but has not been fully excavated. Specifically, the value of judicial application of folk law shows in following aspects:First, it helps to regulate the discretion of the judge. The relatively objective existence of folk law provides judge with an external standard which limits the discretion of judge. Second, it helps to achieve the end of case and promote harmonious justice. Third, it helps to conform to the claim of subject’social life and maintain legal authority. Fourth, it helps to achieve effectively social governance and good governance.Chapter 2 is on the theoretical foundation of judicial application of folk law. The article shows that the benign construction of political state and civil society, the rational communication of great tradition and little tradition, the dynamic balance of formal justice and substantial justice, and the moderate compatibility of legal dogmatics’validity and sociology’validity provide theoretical foundation for judicial application of folk law. Civil society is social foundation on which the rule of law develops, thus we must promote the sound development of multi-stakeholders, public area, folk society organization and social autonomy, and pay close attention to written autonomous rules that folk society organizations lay down. These rules are important parts of folk law and become main sources of law in judicial practice. Meanwhile, we should notice that we can conditionally take advantage of local resources because local society is evolving and civil society is in the early stage of development. Those local resources still have value in flexible protection for special interests; In the process of construction and development of Chinese legal system, the fracture between large tradition and small tradition makes state fall into the legitimacy crisis, so we need to establish a mechanism in order to effectively communicate large tradition and small tradition and dissolve the tension between elite discourse and mass discourse. When we lay laws down and apply them, we should pay attention to folk knowledge and rational function of mass discourse. In the process of construction and development of Chinese legal system, we also need to establish the dynamic balance between formal justice and substantial justice in order to avoid oppressing caused by excessive rule of formal justice and disorder caused by excessive rule of substantial justice. Therefore, judge needs to consider specific environment which case lies in, focus on life logic and correct state law through equity in some cases. Thus, it becomes possible for us to apply folk law in justice; In addition, we need moderate compatibility of legal dogmatics’validity and sociology’validity. Proper application of folk law can avoid the lack of effectiveness of law that caused by only application of state law injustice.Chapter 3 focuses on revealing the status of source of law about folk law. On judicial position, the status of source of law about folk law is not denied though the west movement of codification rose. In the traditional justice of China, folk law as source of law is more mixed with other sources of law to be applied. It is difficult to define the folk law by formal source or informal source. In current China, the status of source of law about folk law turns out internal division. In criminal law and administrative law, we should deny the status of source of law about folk law in the restriction or deprivation about the rights of citizens. In order to overcome the rigidity of statutes, the folk law that can build new legal cause is permitted. In civil law and commercial law, folk law has secondary status of source of law. Under some special circumstances, folk law is prior to the statutes. In the process of developing of rule of law and constitutionalization, written folk law is formal source of law, but customary law and quasi-written folk law are informal sources of law. Although the theory of source of law on judicial position points out direction for judge and sets the status of source of law about folk law, the different encounter of folk law in the case illustrates that the theory of source of law only provides entity support for judicial application of folk law in static way.Chapter 4 is on channel and identification about folk law into justice. In our country’s judicial practice, there are following channels through which folk law can be into justice:legislative approval, judicial interpretation, opinions issued by the Supreme Court, district court’s guiding opinions, guidance through typical case and application of discretion of judge. Although there are many channels through which folk law can be into justice, the application of folk law is not clear for everyone. The existence of folk law is certain in the theory of source of law, but whether folk law exists or not is uncertain in judicial practice. Thus, we need identify folk law. Identification of folk law includes standard of identification and procedure of identification, the former includes effectiveness, legality and good law, the latter includes starting, proving and confirming. Identification of folk law reflects dynamic characteristics of judicial application of folk law and provides procedural support for judicial application of folk law.It is necessary to point out that the theory of source of law provides entity support for judicial application of folk law and the identification of folk law provides procedural support for judicial application of folk law, both lay the foundation for the connection of folk law and legal method. If there is no theory of source of law, there is no foundation on which folk law becomes source of law in judicial practice. If there is no identification of folk law, the possibility of judicial application of folk law is not transformed into reality. Only under the condition of entity possibility and procedural support, we can deep study the relation between folk law and legal method.Chapter 5 is on discovering the relation between folk law and legal method. In the judicial process, there are complex construction activities, that is, judge constructs the major premise and minor premise, which makes it possible to relate folk law with legal method. The methods about judicial application of folk law show in following aspects:First, legal discovery shows that judge needs proper exertion of his initiative to find out the rule suitable for the case from the sources of law. Thus, folk law as one of sources of law becomes one of places of legal discovery, through which folk law can be into justice; Second, legal interpretation is inevitable in the application of law, but it is not mechanically confined in statutes. Under the strategy of moderately open interpretation, folk law can be into justice as source of legal interpretation. Third, because law has loopholes since it was enacted, we need remedial methods among which interest measure lies. Generally speaking, the acceptability of sentence constitutes the basis for legitimacy of interest measure. Because folk law usually reflects people’s position and value orientation during the judge of conflicting interests, the application of folk law in the interest measure will make sentence more acceptable. Meanwhile, folk law can be into justice through interest measure to replenish loophole in the law. Fourth, the confirming of case fact first needs to understand the legal meaning of life fact, then to prove the existence of life fact. In general, there are two kinds of proving methods, including proving the existence of case fact through evidence and deducing the existence of case fact according to empirical rule or logical thinking. Because folk law itself involves the contents of empirical rule, it is possible for folk law to become the basis of confirming case fact into justice. Fifth, judge needs to argue the result of case and persuade the parties to accept it on his own responsibility. The reason that the parties accept the result of case is not external power, but inner identity. If judge properly applies folk law to argue the result of case, the acceptability of argument must increase, which will more convince the parties of the sentence. Thus, folk law can be into justice as a reason of legal argumentation.Chapter 6 is on system construction about judicial application of folk law. In our county’judicial practice, there are some problems about judicial application of folk law, so we should strengthen corresponding system construction. Specifically, Legislation should further clarify the status of source of law about folk law and strengthen the building of procedure for judicial application of folk law. At the same time, we should establish and improve the guiding system of case and the pluralistic dispute settlement mechanism. In addition, we also ought to strengthen the investigation and compilation of folk law and establish and improve the mechanism of judicial review.更多还原