法官如何说理:中国经验与普遍原理  

Justice Reasoning: Chinese Experiences and General Principle

作　　者：凌斌[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院

出　　处：《中国法学》2015年第5期99-117,共19页China Legal Science

摘　　要：中国司法的裁判文书一直因缺乏说理而饱受批评。究其原因,并不能简单归咎于法官的腐败、无能或缺乏督促机制。影响裁判说理的因素,既有隐藏弱点、注重判断、直接沟通等普遍原因,也有其特殊原因,即特定的"法民关系"。在当代中国的"积极法民关系"下,法官的主要说理对象是当事人以及一般公众,而非专业的法律共同体成员。法民关系对裁判说理的制约影响,在德国和美国也同样适用,是一个普遍原理。因此,司法改革无论是模仿德国还是美国,只要不改变中国特殊的法民关系,就不可能从根本上改变司法裁判文书的说理特征。法学界和实务界要把握"四五司法改革"的历史机遇,应当从实际出发,结合法民关系的现实特点,完善中国法官的裁判说理。China＇ s judicial decisions have long been criticized for lack of reasoning. It cannot simply be attributed to corruption, incompetence or lack of supervision, but such common principles as weaknesses hiding, judgment priority, and face-to-face communication as American and European judges do. More important is a special reason, the specific legal popular relationship. Thanks to the positive legal- popular relationship in contemporary China, judicial writings are mainly for parties as well as ordinary people, rather than the members of legal community. It is a universal principle that the legal- popular relationship restrains judicial writings, which is also applicable in American and European countries. Therefore, no matter the judicial reform is to imitate the German or the American models, as long as the positive legal popular relationship does not been changed, it is impossible to change the features of the Chinese judicial writings fundamentally. Given the historic opportunity of the Forth Five Years Agenda of Judicial Reform, the judicial writing reform should take into issue the real characteristics of legal popular relationship.

关 键 词：裁判文书 裁判说理 指导性案例 

分 类 号：D926.2[政治法律—法学]