法官自由裁量权的保障与规制问题研究

【作者】 宋欢欢；

【导师】 陶林；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 马克思主义理论， 2009， 硕士

【摘要】 法官自由裁量权对现实社会有着巨大影响,一直是学术界及司法实务部门探讨的热点话题。虽然“法官是否应当拥有自由裁量权”的问题已基本有了确定答案,但“法官应当拥有多大的自由裁量权”以及“如何规范法官自由裁量权”的争论却远未结束。基于此,笔者在对法官自由裁量权进行深入研究的基础上,重点探讨了我国法官自由裁量权的现状及存在问题的解决之策,希望能为我国的司法进步献出绵薄之力。全文共分四个部分,正文约三万四千字。第一部分概述了法官自由裁量权的基础理论。笔者首先从基本概念入手,解读了国内外学者及司法实务部门关于法官自由裁量权的不同界定和理解,在对比分析和理性思考的基础上,探求法官自由裁量权的科学定义。之后,笔者对法官自由裁量权的特征和分类进行了探讨。提出了法官自由裁量权具有运行的司法性、个案的关联性、行为的选择性、价值的导向性和权力的有限性等五个特点。并依不同的标准将法官自由裁量权进行了三种分类:明示的法官自由裁量权与默示的法官自由裁量权、程序性法官自由裁量权与实体性法官自由裁量权以及认定事实的自由裁量权与适用法律的自由裁量权。接下来,笔者从权力分立的理念、案件事实的“不可复原性”、法律规范的缺陷以及道德对法律的渗透等四个方面论述了法官自由裁量权的存在基础。并从实证的角度,阐释了法官自由裁量权具有实现法治、确保个案正义、引导公众行为以及保障司法效率等价值。第二部分梳理了法官自由裁量权在国内外的历史发展,并探讨了该项权力的演变规律。在普通法系国家中,法官自由裁量权具有存在的天然合理性,属于法官的一项固有权。为了实现公平正义,法官可以创设新的规则,实现“法官造法”。大陆法系国家由于强调立法至上,历来对法官拥有自由裁量权持限制态度,甚至出现了完全否认法官自由裁量的严格规则主义。然而,“法典万能”神话的破灭,使大陆法系国家逐渐认识到了法官能动司法的必然性与合理性,并相继承认了法官的自由裁量权。与大陆法系国家相似,我国在司法理念上也很难公开承认法官的自由裁量权。然而由于法律规范的不完善,加之司法传统的影响,使得我国的法官在司法实践中拥有着英美法系国家法官所无法比拟的“自由”权力。总之,中外法官自由裁量权的产生与发展释明了这种灵活性权力存在的必然性,并揭示了该项权力的演变规律:“正是出于对社会正义的强烈渴求和对裁判者滥用自由权力的恐惧,人们‘始终在推崇广泛的自由裁量权和坚持严苛详尽的规则之间来回摆动。’”最后,笔者还对该项权力的发展进行了预测。一方面,随着时代的飞速发展,法官自由裁量权的范围将不断扩大;另一方面,出于对公正的不懈追求,人们控制自由裁量权的手段将不断增加,措施也将更加严厉。第三部分评述了我国法官自由裁量权的现状。我国法官的自由裁量权在当前的司法实践中处于截然相反的两种处境。一方面,由于司法独立性不够、法官素质不高以及民众的信任缺失,使得我国法官自由裁量权的运行存在着“不自由”的状况。另一方面,权力的本质、人性的弱点以及自由裁量的“自由”特点,使得该项权力又常常处于“超自由”的运行状态。司法实践中,大量不合法以及不合理的自由裁量权的滥用,不仅损害了司法权威、导致了司法腐败,而且破坏了新理念的凝聚,影响了新规则的形成。第四部分提出了保障及控制我国法官自由裁量权的策略。针对“缺位”的自由裁量权,需要采用一定的手段给予保障。第一,应明确法官享有能动司法的“名分”,保证享有权力的“名正言顺”。第二,应深化体制改革,加强法官权力行使的独立性。第三,应提高法官素质,确保自由裁量权的运行质量。针对可能“异化”的自由裁量权,需要采取有效的措施加以规制。第一,要严明自由裁量权的运行原则。第二,要构建“以权制恶”的控权机制。可以通过建立规范、完善制度,以“权力来约束权力”,避免“恶”性的失控。第三,应不断探索“以善去恶”的制约模式。通过加强“司法良心”的教育,逐步强化法官的正义感和使命感,激发人性中的“善”性,培养法官公正无私的品格。更多还原

【Abstract】 The judicial discretion has a huge influence on society and is always the hot topic in the academic and practical circle. The question whether a judge should have judicial discretion basically has a positive answer, however, there is no positive answer to the question what is the limit to the judicial discretion and how should the judicial discretion be regulated. So, the author conducts a profound research on the judicial discretion, and elaborates on the status quo of the judicial discretion in China and the solution to these problems, hoping to make an effort to promote the development of judicial progress.This essay, with about 34,000 words, falls into four parts:In the first part, the author introduces the basic theories on the judicial discretion. First, based on the basic theories, the author analyses different definitions and understandings offered by the scholars and experts home and abroad, to provide a scientific definition. After that, the author discusses the features and classification of judicial discretion. The judicial discretion has five features and can be classified into three categories: expressed judicial discretion and implied judicial discretion; procedural judicial discretion and substantive judicial discretion; factual judicial discretion and legal judicial discretion. Then the author elaborates the theoretical foundation and value of judicial discretion.In the second part, the author discusses the historical development and the rule evolution of judicial discretion home and abroad. In the common law countries, judicial discretion has its inherent reasonableness and can be described as an inherent power owned by judges. For the sake of fairness and justice, judges can create new rules to make new laws. In the continental law countries, legislative supremacy is prevailing. So judicial discretion owned by judges are limited or even denied. With the weakening of the concept that the code is omnipotent, gradually judges in the continental law countries are endowed with judicial discretion. Similar to the continental law countries, we do not publically admit the judicial discretion. However, because of the imperfectness of the legal regulations and the influence of the judicial tradition, judges in China factually have much greater power than their counterparts in the common law countries. The creation and evolution of judicial discretion displays the necessity of the existence of such flexible power and its evolution rule: out of the strong desire for social justice and fear for the power abuse of the judges, people are swing from advocating great judicial power to maintaining rigid and detailed regulations. In the end, the author predicts the development of this power. With the rapid development of this society, the scope of judicial discretion power will be expanded; in the meantime, out of the desire for justice, the regulatory measures on judicial discretion will be more diverse and rigid.In the third part, the author analyzes the status quo of the operation of the judicial discretion in China. On one side, there exist many limits on the operation of judicial discretion because of the lack of independent justice, judges with high quality and public faith; on the other side, judges arbitrarily enjoy this power out of the nature of power, the weakness of human nature and the features of discretion. In practice, the abuse of judicial discretion damages the judicial authority and leads to judicial corruption, and obstructs the creation of new rules.In the fourth part, the author put forward the measures for safeguarding and regulating the judicial discretion. On one side, we should safeguard judicial discretion. Firstly, judicial discretion should be clearly endowed with judges. Secondly, judges can independently exercise their judicial discretion. Thirdly, the quality of judges should be improved to make sure the good operation of judicial discretion. On the other side, we should take effective measures to regulate the arbitrary use of judicial discretion. Firstly, the operation rules should be made clear. Secondly, the check mechanism should be established. Thirdly, education of judicial professional morals should be conducted.更多还原