Study On Bayles’ Theory Of Procedural Justice

Research on procedural justice, most scholars focus on the justice issues in a particular procedure, but did not provide general procedural justice theory to support its claim. General considerations of procedural justice are mainly concentrated in the procedural law, administrative law, natural justice and the Constitution of the United States in the "due process". Michael· D· Bayles is a professor at Florida State University in the United States. Through the procedure theory with a general summary of the opinion in common law countries since1960s,from a broader perspective of theoretical thinking,Bayles puts forward a system of procedural justice theory.In accordance with the views of Galligan,a scholar of United Kingdom,it is through the efforts of Bayles,a jurisprudence plays an important role in the comprehensive program to develop the theory.This paper aims to to fully grasp the meaning of procedural justice thought Bayles procedural justice theory to provide a reference for the development and improvement of procedural justice in our country.Procedural justice ideology originated in the ancient natural ideology, as a rule of law,concept of "natural justice" first appeared in the British and the United States of "due process of law". Since the1960s, British and American scholars reflect the traditional "natural justice" and the "due process of law" on the basis of the principle, put forward a series of opposite theory of procedural justice. Represented by Posner, Dworkin,procedure instrumentalism deems that legal procedures do not have independent value, it is just a tool to achieve substantive law or an extrinsic value; but represented by Mr. Summers, program selfish departmentalism is completely denies the tool value, think the legal process has its own intrinsic value. Baylor through the analysisand summary of these theories, proposed a comprehensive theory of procedural justice, implements the program instrumentalism and selfish departmentalism.Bayles stone to Posner, Dworkin and Summers for reference of the theory of procedural justice, put forward the general theory of procedural justice. The theory mainly includes three elements:the four principles of procedural justice, the evaluation standard of procedural justice and procedural justice applicable legal boundaries. First of all,Bayles put forward the principle of the four principles of justice to summarizing British and American traditional program, namely no groups decided to chance, seize the opportunity of hearing, principle and form of justice principle. Second, Bayles put forward a comprehensive value standard to evaluate the legal process in comprehensive economic cost theory, Dworkin Posner moral cost theory and Summers procedures based on value theory. Finally, Bayles that procedural justice is not applicable in all situations, the specific applicable procedural justice should be considered when five factors limit.Bayles procedural justice theory involves almost all scholars since the1960s procedural justice theory, more comprehensive procedural justice argument, deepened the perception of procedural justice, contribute to good legal and social orderthe construction. Bayles procedural justice theory to achieve a fusion of the program instrumentalist and proceduralism, so as to solve the contradiction between the two. However, because Bayles program with a clear comprehensive theory of justice, so the lack of procedural justice thinking necessary theoretical depth, Bayles a general discussion of the theory of procedural justice, and not such as procedural justice entities justice issues such as conflict and coordination analysis, which to some extent affected the completeness of the theoretical system.Bayles procedural justice theory analysis, it is not difficult to find that procedural justice theory of procedural justice in our country’s development and improvement of an important reference, which is mainly manifested in the following three areas:firstly, to promote the values of our programchange; reasonable definition of the scope of application of the principles of procedural justice; third, the guiding China’s legislative and judicial practice.