论文部分内容阅读
从陆而启所著的《意见裁判主义》一书的研究谱系和其可行性来看,“意见裁判主义”已有一定的理论和实践基础。首先法实证主义为“意见裁判主义”的主张提供了一定的理论背景,反过来“意见裁判主义”也可以看作是法实证主义理论的一种适用;而意见裁判主义的主张也在一定程度上符合法律推理的特质。其次,司法作为意见交流的平台既与法功能论视现代司法为重要的公共交往渠道的观点吻合,又是利益多元社会中司法判断获得正当性的一种方式。但“意见裁判主义”理论在保障辩护人的权利,达成多方合意的效果以及具体实施方式等方面还不明朗。
According to the pedigree and feasibility of “Opinion Referee” written by Lu and Kai, there is a certain theoretical and practical basis for “opinion refereeism.” First of all, the positivism provides a certain theoretical background for the proposition of “opinion refereeism.” In turn, the “opinion referee” can also be regarded as a kind of application of the theory of legal positivism; and the opinion of the opinion referee Also to a certain extent, meet the characteristics of legal reasoning. Second, judiciary as a platform for the exchange of opinions is not only consistent with the view that legal function regards modern justice as an important public communication channel, but also a way to obtain the legitimacy of judicial judgment in a multi-interest society. However, the theory of “opinion referee” is still unclear in terms of safeguarding the rights of defenders, achieving the multi-desired results and the specific implementation methods.