级别：硕士
提交日期：2003年5月10日
论文答辩日期：2003年5月26日
论文中文题目： 立法准备阶段中的立法论证研究--一种法理学的思考
论文英文题目：Research on the Demonstration of Legislation in the Preparatory Phase of Legislation --The Consideration in Jurisprudence
作者：汤善鹏
所学专业：法学理论
所在单位：吉林大学法学院
指导教师： 马新福 教授
所在单位：吉林大学法学院
分类标识：DF01
中文主题标识：立法论证
英文主题标识：demonstration of legislation
总页数： 66页
中文摘要：论文摘要对立法论证的研究是一个当今法学理论研究中比较薄弱的环节。在我国建设法治化国家的进程中，不可否认，立法是一个关键的环节，法治首先就要求“有法可依”。那么，如何保证立法者制定的法律真正代表人民的心声，正确地反映社会的立法需求呢？社会的立法需求是如何反映出来的？立法者如何对是否立法进行实质论证呢？立法论证理论就应运而生了。对具体社会关系进行立法，首先就应当解决是否立法的问题，也就是对立法的必要性和可行性进行论证，这些都是在立法的准备阶段中完成的。因此，笔者将文章的理论焦点对准立法准备阶段中的立法论证，其理论目的是试图从立法的原点出发来探讨法是如何生成的问题，从另一个角度来讲也是为了限制立法者的立法权。本文的最终目的，也就是为制定“良法”寻找一种理论背景和实践模式。如果将法的生成看成一个课题的话，本文就算其中的子课题。本篇文章并不是从具体的实在法入手，而是从法理的角度探讨立法论证的一般理论。本文分为三个部分。
第一部分，对立法论证的原理进行阐释。立法论证是一个派生概念，它是在论证理论基础上建立起来的，因此，欲全面展开立法准备阶段中立法论证研究，必须讨论“论证”概念。笔者认为，在论证理论里，人们对论据和论证结论的“承认”和“可接受性”，取代论据和论题的“真实性”，具有一定的科学性，因为，真理是相对性和绝对性的结合，任何人的认识都带有时代的局限性。由此，笔者得出立法论证的概念：立法论证是指在立法活动过程中一定的主体依靠占有具体社会关系的有效信息，通过对话、交涉，取舍、整合立法的有效资源，最终达成一致的证成或证伪的过程。从法理上讲，它具有以下几个理论特征：主观选择性；客观依赖性；利益妥协性。笔者认为，在立法准备阶段中立法论证的主体和内容上都与正式立法阶段中的立法论证不同。在主体上，前者较后者广泛；在内容上，前者主要是对是否立法进行论证，而后者主要是对怎样立法进行论证。
第二部分，笔者详细论述了立法论证的起点，也即立法者是如何发现社会的立法需求，进而抽象出立法目的，进行具体立法。笔者首先阐述了立法者对待立法需求的思维方式。笔者认为，立法者视野的视力必须聚焦到社会的立法需求范围内，就对待立法需求而言，立法者应当显示出科学发现的态度，而不应当是主观设计的思维方式。进而，笔者详细论述了立法需求的发现方式。立法者发现社会的立法需求有两种方式：一是立法视野中的个案事实；一是立法需求的推定。立法视野中的个案事实是一个十分复杂的概念，而理论界也较少对它进行探讨。笔者试图对它的理论特征进行了理论诠释。立法视野中的个案事实，不能根据现有的法律规范进行规制，也即它不是法律事实；立法视野中的个案事实，存在着法律规范规制的可为性或必为性；立法视野中的个案事实，必须表现出一定的普遍性，或者立法者能合理地预见到这种个案发生所带来的社会无序性将达到严重的程度，也即它具有一定的代表性和典型性。笔者以社会发生的一个具体个案事实??性骚扰案例入手，来佐证立法视野中的个案事实的理论特征。立法需求发现的第二种方式则更为复杂，因为第一种方式遵循的理论逻辑上从事实到规范，它有一个客观的事实背景；而第二种方式遵循的理论逻辑是从规则到事实，那么，立法者是依据什么来制定这种构成性规则的呢？笔者认为，一是根据实体法律实施的需要，实体法律需要制定程序法来保证其实施；一是根据现有的经济、政治、文化内涵的原则细化的需要。笔者进而探讨了对立法需求的提炼，即从复杂的社会关系中抽象为语境式的立法目的。
文章的第三部分对立法准备阶段中立法论证的主要内容进行了探讨。笔者认为，对立法的可行性和必要性进行论证，可以从价值论证和成本论证入手来解决。当然，主要内容并不是全部内容，在这里，主要是对是否立法进行实质论证，其实，对立法进行形式论证也十分重要，但这里它并不是文章的重点。笔者对价值论证从三个方面进行论述：现代立法是对多元社会所具有的多元利益的一种整合；立法应当对多元利益进行价值衡量。在文章中，笔者重点谈到立法与它应当具备的同民众的精神状态相一致的价值形态??民情之间的关系。笔者认为，立法应当与民情相互融合，才能实现人民对法律的爱戴和信仰。立法的成本论证也就是立法欲实现立法目的，还必须论证怎样使付出的成本低于获得的效益，立法最终在社会上取得实效。但是在立法准备阶段中，法律并没有在社会中得到实施，并没有效益可言，因此，立法成本论证不仅应当考虑到立法机关制定立法的成本，更重要的是要看到立法的社会成本，在此基础上，还应当看到立法的机会成本、寻租成本等。这种“大”立法成本的分析，将有助于我们对法律实施情况有一个理论上的预期，同时，也是对立法的可行性进行了论证，成本太大，只能等待立法时机或是放弃立法，当然，前提是不能放弃对公平、正义的保障。同时，在对立法进行成本论证时，不能仅仅从立法者的角度来考虑，还应当从法律受体??公民、组织的角度考虑他们适用法律将付出的成本，只有这样，才能保证立法的科学性。
英文摘要： Abstract The research on the demonstration of legislation is an inside weak link in the research of legal theory. In the process of the rule of law in our country, it can't be denied that the legislation is a critical link because the rule of law requires firstly that the law is available. Then, how can we guarantee the law reflect the people’s true feelings and reflect the legislative requirements of society accurately? How do the legislative requirements of society come out? How does the legislature proceed the substantial demonstration whether to make a law or not? The theory of demonstration of legislation emerges with the tide of the times. The fist step of legislature should settle the problem that whether we make laws in the concrete social relation or not, that is, they must demonstrate that the necessity and feasibility of legislation. All these are finished in the preparatory phase of legislation. Therefore, the writer’s focus is on the demonstration of legislation in this phase and the theoretical purpose is to explore how the law comes up through the research on the origin of legislation, in other words, it is trying to limit the power of legislature. The final purpose of this paper is to find a theoretical background and practical mode to make “good laws”. If we regard the generation of law as a problem, this paper is the sub-problem. This paper is not through a specific way of concrete laws, but through the theory of jurisprudence to explore the general theory of demonstration of legislation. This paper is divided into three parts.
The first part is to interpret the principles in the demonstration of legislation. The concept of “demonstration of legislation” is a sub-conception and it is based on the foundation of the concept of “demonstration”, therefore, if we want to launch a complete research on demonstration of legislation in preparatory phase of legislation, we must study the concept of “demonstration”. In demonstration theory, some scholars’ opinion replaces the traditional theory at present, in which the grounds of argument and proposition must be “true”. They think people’s “acknowledgement” and “acceptability” to the grounds of argument and the conclusion of argument is more appropriate. The paper shows that the truth is a combination of relation and absoluteness, the knowledge of everyone has limitation for his time. From here, the writer deduces the concept of “demonstration of legislation”. It is a process of confirmation or proving false that certain people rely on the valid information of concrete social relation, and then pass the dialogue and negotiation, through which take or reject and conform the legislative resources, finally reach on agreement. Speak from the legal theory, it has a few theory characters: subjective selectivity; objective dependence; beneficial compromise. The writer thought that the corpus and contents of demonstration of legislation in preparatory phase of legislation are different from the formal phase of legislation. On the corpus, the former is extensive than the latter; on the contents, the former is primarily to demonstrate whether legislate or not, the latter is primarily to demonstrate how to legislate.
In the second part, the writer discussed in detail the starting point of demonstration of legislation, namely how legislature discovers social legislative requirements, then extracts out the legislative purpose, proceeds concrete legislation. The writer interpreted at first that the way the legislature treats with legislative requirements .The writer thought that the sight of the legislature must focus on the scope of social legislative requirements, with regard to treating with legislative requirements, the legislature should take the objective attitude that displays a scientific discovery, but not the subjective attitude. Then, the writer discussed in detail the methods of detection in legislative requirements. There are two kinds of methods: the individual cases in the legislative visual field; predicting the legislative requirements. The research on the individual cases in the legislative visual field is very complicated. However, few scholars in academic circle study this field. The writer tried to interpret the theoretical characters of this field. In the writer’s opinion, there are three characters. First, the individual cases in the legislative visual field can not abide by the current law norm, namely it is not a law fact; Second, the individual cases in the legislative visual field exist the possibility or necessity of norm rules; the individual cases in the legislative visual field must express a certain catholicity, or the legislature can foresee reasonably the serious degree of social disorders that this kind of cases bring about, namely they must be representative and typical .The writer demonstrated the characters of the individual cases after studying a concrete individual case that takes place in the society. It is “sexual harass”. The second method of discovery of social legislative requirements is more complicated, because the theory logical path that the first method follows is from facts to norm, it has an objective factual background; but the second method is from norm to facts. So, how does the legislature establish this kind of composing regular? The writer thought, first, according to the requirements of entity laws legislature want to make laws, because entity laws demand establishing the procedure norms to guarantee its putting into practice. Second, to make details of the principles of the current economy, politics, culture content legislature wants to make laws. The writer then made an inquiry into the extraction of legislature requirements namely abstracts out the legislative purpose in linguistic situation from complicate social relations.
The third part of this paper makes an inquiry into the main contents in the demonstration of legislation in the preparatory phase. The writer thought that we could demonstrate the necessity and feasibility of legislation through value demonstration and cost demonstration. Certainly, main contents cannot include all contents, here, the theoretical purpose is primarily to make a substantial demonstration whether legislate or not. In fact, the formal demonstration of legislation is also very important, but here it is not the focus of this paper. The writer proceeded the value demonstration from three aspects: the modern legislation is a kind of integration of the diverse benefits in diverse social relations; The legislature should make measures on values to the diverse benefits .In this part the writer primarily pointed out the relation between legislation and “people’s feelings”, which the legislation must conform to .The writer thought that only if the legislation conforms to the “people’s feelings”, can achieve people’s love and belief to the law .The cost demonstration is that to achieve the purpose of legislation, legislature must demonstrate how to make legislative cost be lower than the winning, how to make the legislation obtain the actual effects in the society. However, in preparatory phase of legislation, the law has not put into practice in society, therefore, there is no performance to be talked. So, the cost demonstration of legislation should consider not only the cost of legislature in making laws but also the social cost of legislation. On the foundation of this, legislature should consider the opportunity cost and rent cost of legislation and so on. The analysis of this kind of " large" legislative cost is beneficial to us to expect the effect of the law after it’s putting into practice. At the same time, it is also beneficial to demonstrate the feasibility of legislation. If the cost is too big, we must wait for the legislative opportunity or abandon it. Certainly, the premise is that we cannot abandon fairness and justice. Meanwhile, when we proceed the cost demonstration of legislation, we should not consider only the angle of the legislature, we must also consider another angle--the men who observe the law, because they will pay costs in abiding by the law. Only we fulfill the demonstration of legislation, can we guarantee the scientific state of legislation.
