删除或更新信息，请邮件至freekaoyan#163.com(#换成@)

主观程序正义对司法的意义

中国政法大学 辅仁网/2017-06-25
主观程序正义对司法的意义
苏新建; 1:浙江工商大学法学院 摘要(Abstract)：

与根据特定规范性标准来判定某个程序是否正义的客观程序正义不同,主观程序正义关注程序参加者或观察者对程序的主观感受,以及基于此对程序的公正性的评断。以民众对正义的感知和心理预期为中介,主观程序正义可以把纠纷解决程序和解决效果有机地联系起来。主观程序正义影响到民众对司法机构的信任和对司法决定的服从,并影响到民众对司法正当性的判断。了解民众对正义的感知,重视主观程序正义的作用,可以为提升司法形象、改进司法工作提供新的思路。

关键词(KeyWords)： 主观程序正义;;纠纷解决;;司法

Abstract:

Keywords:

基金项目(Foundation): 国家社科基金项目(项目编号:13CZZ022);;司法部项目(项目编号:13SFB5005);;浙江省自然科学基金项目(项目编号:LY13G030015);;浙江省“钱江人才”项目(项目编号:QJC1302015)的研究成果

作者(Author): 苏新建;

Email:


参考文献(References)： [1][日]谷口安平:《程序的正义与诉讼(增补本)》,王亚新、刘荣军译,中国政法大学出版社2002年版。[2][美]罗斯科·庞德:《法理学》(第1卷),邓正来译,中国政法大学出版社2005年版。[3][英]汤姆·宾汉:《法治:英国首席大法官如是说》,陈雅晴译,商务印书馆(香港)2013版。①Tom R.Tyler,Social Justice:Outcome and Procedure,International Journal of Psychology,Vol.35(2)(2000).②Id..①Tom R.Tyler,Social Justice:Outcome and Procedure,International Journal of Psychology,Vol.35(2)(2000).②当然,按照一些学者的观点,“程序正义”事实上早就存在了:“程序正义的观念是发生、发达于英国法并为美国法所继承的正当程序思想为背景而形成和展开的;在英美法里,满足正当程序要件的程序才是合乎程序正义的程序,反过来说合乎程序正义的程序就是正当程序”。如果这样的话,程序正义在事实上存在的历史比“程序正义”这个词语存在的历史要长的多,但无论如何,二战后程序正义才真正引起大范围学者的关注。关于“程序正义”与“正当程序”这两个概念之间的联系,请参见[日]谷口安平:《程序的正义与诉讼(增补本)》,王亚新、刘荣军译,中国政法大学出版社2002年版,第4页。③E.Allan Lind and Tom R.Tyler,The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice,Plenum Press,p.1(1988).④Id..⑤See Hans Kelsen,Was is Gerechtigkeit,Wien 1953,S.23f.转引自刘幸义主编:《多元价值、宽容与法律——亚图·考夫曼教授纪念集》,五南图书出版公司2004年版,第242页。①Klaus F.Rhl and Stefan Machura,Procedural Justice,Ashgate,p.4(1997).②See John Rawls,A Theory of Justice,Belknap Press of Harvard University Press(1971)。中译本参见[美]罗尔斯:《正义论》,何怀宏等译,中国社会科学出版社1988年版。③Id.,p.3.①Tom R.Tyler(eds),Procedural Justice,Ashgate,Vol.1,p.15(2005).②Id..③See Paul v.Davis,424 U.S.693.④See John Thibaut and Laurens Walker,Procedural Justice:A Psychological Analysis,Lawrence Erlbaum Associates(1975).⑤E.Allan Lind and Tom R.Tyler,The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice,Plenum Press,p.7(1988).⑥Tom R.Tyler,Procedural Justice Research,Social Justice Research,Vol.1(1)(1987).①在后来的文章中,他们认为美国的“对抗式”司法体系可以引导得出一个能够让民众感到公平的结果;而欧陆的“纠问式”的司法体系(Inquisitorial System)则在发现案件的真相上更具优势。非常有意思的是,锡博特和华尔克这篇文章的题目是“A Theory of Procedure”,与罗尔斯的著作“A Theory of Justice”听起来很相像。不知是因为他们受到罗尔斯的影响,还是故意取此名以与罗尔斯分庭相对。如果从研究的内容来看,罗尔斯与锡博特、华尔克的确分属于不同的谱系,即分别属于客观程序正义和主观程序正义。See John Thibaut and Laurens Walker,A Theory of Procedure,California Law Review,Vol.66(3),pp.541-566(1978).②Tom R.Tyler,Procedural Justice Research,Social Justice Research,Vol.1(1)(1987).③Tom R.Tyler(eds),Procedural Justice,Ashgate,Vol.1,p.XII(2005).④E.Allan Lind and Tom R.Tyler,The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice,Plenum Press,p.3(1988).⑤Neil Vidmar,The Origins and Consequences of Procedural Fairness,Law and Social Inquiry,Vol.15(4)(1990).⑥Konovsky.M.,Understanding Procedural Justice and its Impact on Business Organizations,Journal of Management,Vol.26(3)(2000).⑦Klaus F.Rhl and Stefan Machura,Procedural Justice,Ashgate,p.4(1997).⑧Neil Vidmar,The Origins and Consequences of Procedural Fairness,Law and Social Inquiry,Vol.15(4)(1990).①例如,泰勒(Tyler)教授在近期的一个关于征地程序的研究中,把司法程序同谈判(private negotiation)程序、行政听证(administrative law hearings)程序、公共听证(public hearings)程序和公投(public referendums)程序进行了细致的比较。See Tyler Tom and Markell David L.,The Public Regulation of Land Use Decisions:Criteria for Evaluating Alternative Procedures,Journal of Empirical Legal Studies,Vol.7(3),pp.538-573(2010).②E.Allan Lind and Tom R.Tyler,The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice,Plenum Press,pp.36-40(1988).③Kitzmann K.M.and Emery R.E.,Procedural Justice and Parents'Satisfaction in a Field Study of Child Custody Dispute Resolution,Law and Human Behavior,Vol.17(5)(1993).④Joel Brockner,Phyllis A.Siegel,Joseph P.Daly,Tom Tyler and Christopher Martin,When Trust Matters,Administrative Science Quarterly,Vol.42(3),1997.⑤See Tom R.Tyler,The Role of Perceived Injustice in Defendants'Evaluations of Their Courtroom Experience,Law and Society Review Vol.18,(1),pp.51-74(1984);Tyler,T,R.,and Folger,R.,Distributional and Procedural Aspects of Satisfaction With Citizen-Police Encounters,Basic and Applied Social Psychology,Vol.1(4),pp.281-292(1980).⑥Jonathan D.Casper,Tom Tyler and Bonnie Fisher,Procedural Justice in Felony Cases,Law and Society Review,Vol.22(3)(1988).⑦Van den Bos Kees,Wilke Henk A.M.,Lind E.Allan,Vermunt Ril,Evaluating Outcomes by Means of the Fair Process Effect:Evidence for Different Processes in Fairness and Satisfaction Judgments,Social Psychology,Vol.74(6),1998.⑧Adler.J.W.,Hensler.D.R.and Nelson.C.E,Simple Justice:How Litigants Fare in the Pittsburgh Court Arbitration Program,Santa Monica,Rand,R-3071-ICJ(1983).①Tom R.Tyler,Procedural Justice and the Courts,Court Review,Vol.44(1/2)(2007).②Pruitt D.G.,Peirce R.S.,Zubek J.M.,Welton G.L.,and Nochajski T.H.,Goal Achievement,Procedural Justice and the Outcome of Community Mediation,International Journal of Conflict Management,Vol.1(1)(1990).③Paternoster R.,Brame R.,Bachman R.,and Sherman L.W.,Do Fair Procedures Matter?The Effect of Procedural Justice on Spouse Assault,Law and Society Review,Vol.31(1)(1997).④Jon P.McClanahan,Safeguarding the Propriety of the Judiciary,North Carolina Law Review,Vol.91(6)(2013).⑤Kitzmann K.M.and Emery R.E.,Procedural Justice and Parents'Satisfaction in a Field Study of Child Custody Dispute Resolution,Law and Human Behavior,Vol.17(5)(1993).⑥Rebecca Hollander-Blumoff and Tom R.Tyler,Procedural Justice in Negotiation:Procedural Fairness,Outcome Acceptance,and Integrative Potential,Law and Social Inquiry,Vol.33(2)(2008).⑦Tom R.Tyler(eds),Procedural Justice,Ashgate,Vol.1,p.XVIIII(2005).⑧See Tom R.Tyler,Why People Obey the Law,Princeton University Press,pp.41-56(2006).①Tom R.Tyler,Procedural Justice and the Courts,Court Review,Vol.44(1/2)(2007).②Jonathan D.Casper,Tom Tyler and Bonnie Fisher,Procedural Justice in Felony Cases,Law and Society Review,Vol.22(3)(1988).③Sunshine J.,and Tyler T.R.,The Role of Procedural Justice and Legitimacy in Shaping Public Support for Policing,Law and Society Review,Vol.37(3)(2003).④Neil Vidmar,The Origins and Consequences of Procedural Fairness,Law and Social Inquiry,Vol.15(4)(1990).⑤Id..⑥See Brett,J.M.,Commentary on Procedural?Justice Papers.In R.J.Lewicki,B.H.Sheppard,and M.H.Bazerman(Eds.),Research on negotiation in organizations:Vol.1,JAI Press,pp.81-90(1986).⑦Tyler Tom R.,Karen Rasinski,and N.Spodick,The Influence of Voice on Satisfaction with Leaders,Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,Vol.48(1)(1985).⑧See Leventhal G.S,What Should Be Done with Equity Theory?in K.J.Gergen,M.S.Greenberg,and R.H.Weiss(eds.),Social Exchange:Advances in Theory and Research,Plenum(1980).⑨Tom R.Tyler,Procedural Justice and the Courts,Court Review,Vol.44(1/2)(2007).①事实上,西方关于主观程序正义的研究结论,已经被一些中国学者引介为规范的学说来用。最近的如季卫东教授的在谈到法制权威时,引用泰勒教授的研究结论为其佐证,参见季卫东:“论法制权威”,载《中国法学》2013年第1期;孙笑侠教授在其著作中也引述了西方学者部分主观程序正义的研究结论,参见孙笑侠:《程序的法理》,商务印书馆2005年版,第94-96页。②Tom R.Tyler,Social Justice:Outcome and Procedure,International Journal of Psychology,Vol.35(2)(2000).③Rainer Forst,Contexts of Justice:Political Philosophy beyond Liberalism and Communitarianism,University of California Press,p.241(2002).

相关话题/程序 司法 中国政法大学 历史 正义

Free考研考试FreeKaoYan.Com
欢迎来到Free考研考试，"为实现人生的Free而奋斗"

© 2020 FreeKaoYan! . All rights reserved.