后果主义裁判的边界

The Boundaries of Consequentialist Judging

摘要: 不同于传统以法律规范为起点的演绎推理模式，后果导向裁判思维采取逆向模式，将对裁判结果的预判作为论证的前置依据。这种思维本身存在缺陷，裁判后果的可预测性不足、评价尺度缺乏统一标准，且无法独立作为终局性裁判依据。为防止其被滥用或误用，需严格限定后果考量的范围，并且裁判者只有在常规法律方法穷尽后，才能将其作为最后手段进行考虑，同时必须承担更严格的论证义务，将后果考量始终置于既定法律框架内，作为辅助司法裁判的补充手段。

Abstract: Unlike the traditional deductive reasoning model based on legal norms, the consequentialist judging thinking adopts an inverse mode, taking the prediction of the judging outcome as the prerequisite basis for the argumentation. This thinking itself has flaws. The predictability of the judging outcome is insufficient, the evaluation scale lacks a unified standard, and it cannot independently serve as the final judging basis. To prevent its abuse or misuse, the scope of consequential consideration needs to be strictly limited, and the judge can only consider it as the final means after exhausting conventional legal methods. At the same time, they must bear a stricter obligation of argumentation, always placing the consideration of consequences within the established legal framework as a supplementary means to assist judicial judgment.