|
|
|
| Reasonable Justice Is an Effective Way to Resolve the Conflicts Between Emotion and Law: A Multi-dimensional Exposition of Difficult Criminal Cases Based on Reason |
| Liang Jian1, Hou Liwei2 |
1.Guanghua School of Law, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China
2.Political Department of Tongxiang People's Court, Jiaxing 314500, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract A conflict would sometimes appear between “case justice” and “judging according to law”. The dilemma of the kind arises in that conflicts exist between the stability and justice of law, from the perspective of jurisprudence, whereas there is no perfect match between the legal rules and social life, from the perspective of legislation. And from the perspective of judicature, it seems not an easy job for jurisdiction to find out an exactly effective approach to a proper application of requirements of reason and emotion into judicature. Therefore, the judicature with the ideal application of reason and emotion which aims at producing corresponding judicial judgment is supposed to obtain such properties as the thoroughness of reasoning, the legitimacy of values, the supplementary of rules, the needs of execution and the practicability of approaches. Justice based upon reason and emotion uses thinking in both reason and emotion to deal with the conflicts between emotion and law by unifying reasonable and emotional evaluation and regulation evaluation, which is not only the inheritance and development of traditional judicial culture but also an effective way to respond to people’s reasonable and emotional value demands. Justice based upon reason and emotion needs the justification foundation for resolving conflicts between emotion and law. It is necessary to search for the law resources of reason and emotion beyond the legal rules, paying attention to the embodiment of people’s ethical demands and emotional demands in the judiciary, promoting a benign interaction between reasonable evaluation and regularity evaluation, be ready for discovery and judgment based upon reason and emotion in the process of criminal adjudication, maintaining it in the track of the rules of law. Instead of mechanical application of law or judicial technicalization, the conscious and active application of rational and emotional justice is the necessary process of the demonstration of the judiciary’s “spirit” and “temperature” of the referee that not only tends to make a simple formal logic inference, but also needs to incorporate the reasonable needs of value judgment and benefit measurement to reflect the reasonable core of a fair referee. The judicial personnel need to rely on the judicial conscience, exert their own judicial wisdom, place justice within the scope of ethics and above public emotion through the process of keeping pace with the times to explain the law, and make a judgment that fully reflects the needs of reason and emotion within the existing legal framework. Only in this way can the judicial judgment be accepted by the people. The acceptability of referee is the success of reasonable justice to resolve the conflicts between emotion and law. To enhance the acceptability of referee, much attention needs to be focused upon the following five points: the first, reasonable evaluation is the link between legal conviction and ethical conviction; the second, the social harmfulness is an important consideration for the criminalization of legislation and the criminalization of justice; the third, the integration of rational thinking into legal interpretation is the inherent requirement of referee acceptability; the fourth, a full use of the “discretionary reduction” regulation to resolve the conflict between emotion and law; and the last, enhancement of the reasoning and moderation of the rhetoric of judgment documents. This paper has a practical guiding significance for solving cases of conflicts between emotion and law in judicial practice.
|
|
Received: 15 August 2022
|
|
|
|
1 雷磊： 《法律方法、法的安定性与法治》，《法学家》2015年第4期，第1-19页。
2 郭忠： 《发现生活本身的秩序——情理司法的法理阐释》，《法学》2021年第12期，第27-42页。
3 美］E.博登海默： 《法理学：法律哲学与法律方法》，邓正来译，北京：中国政法大学出版社，2017年。
4 戴建华： 《论法的安定性原则》，《法学评论》2020年第5期，第41-46页。
5 蔡宝刚、刘勇： 《论法律的“惰性品格”及其消减》，《求是学刊》2013年第4期，第107-113页。
6 德］汉斯·海因里希·耶赛克、托马斯·魏根特： 《德国刑法教科书（总论）》，徐久生译，北京：中国法制出版社，2001年。
7 胡云腾： 《执法办案如何做到法理情兼顾》，《法律适用》2020年第17期，第60-71页。
8 董长春： 《司法环节：情理在传统司法中的作用分析》，《云南大学学报法学版》2012年第4期，第33-38页。
9 翟俊义、宋四辈： 《传统中国司法裁判中的情理——以“安崇绪之狱”为例》，《北京社会科学》2022年第8期，第74-82页。
10 陈小洁： 《中国传统司法判例情理表达的方式——以〈刑案汇览〉中裁判依据的选取为视角》，《政法论坛》2015年第3期，第114-124页。
11 法］孟德斯鸠： 《论法的精神》，许明龙译，北京：商务印书馆，2012年。
12 任强： 《司法方法在裁判中的运用——法条至上、原则裁判与后果衡量》，《中国社会科学》2017年第4期，第121-142页。
13 舒国滢： 《法学方法论》，北京：中国政法大学出版社，2018年。
14 卢梭： 《社会契约论》，何兆武译，北京：商务印书馆，2003年。
15 胡云腾： 《司法的法治使命是滋养法律》，《法制日报》2013年10月31日，第9版。
16 胡云腾： 《论理解与践行“努力让人民群众在每一个司法案件中感受到公平正义”的几个问题》，《中国青年社会科学》2020年第1期，第1-9页。
17 江必新： 《司法审判中非法律因素的考量》，《人民司法》2019年第34期，第39-45页。
18 陈绍松： 《司法裁判的评价与认同》，《法学杂志》2018年第1期，第66-76页。 |
|
|
|
2023, Vol. 53 
