Discussion On The Administration Of Justice In Legal Reasoning

In recent years, with the increasing people’s awareness of the rule of law and judicialreform step, legal reasoning, more and more people’s attention. Experts and scholars at homeand abroad for a broad and deep discussion of legal reasoning, because the legal reasoning ofthe content are different, scholars have different interpretations of legal reasoning.Is the specific subject of legal reasoning in the practice of law, the use of logic thinkingmethod, combining the legal and factual material known, Furthermore, demonstrated thatlegal decision thinking activities. It has a practical, logical, legitimacy, debates and othercharacteristics of this legal reasoning is different from the other logical way of thinking aboutit is because of the presence of these features, and when the judges in the application of legalreasoning in the judgment and make decisions more rationality, more persuasive. Of course,the law has stiff and hysteresis characteristics of, and also has a certain vagueness in legallanguage, which would make the deviation of the judges in the application of the law will,cannot come to the correct decision. While the judge’s legal reasoning, looking for legalgrounds for judicial decisions, openly courts judicial process to the public, so as to make thecourts more equitable. Law is stable, society is ever-changing, legal rules cannot apply to eachspecific case. In this case, the judge’s legal reasoning shall be used, extracted from theexisting rules of law legal principles to safeguard judicial authority under the premise, rationalinterpretation of the law, in order to achieve fairness and justice.Most scholars believe that the process of legal reasoning is a form of legal reasoning andsubstance reasoning combining both forms of legitimacy of external demand and internalpursuit of substantive rationality. In judicial practice in the long term, formal reasoning is thatpeople from many forms of reasoning inductive logic of complete tools is essential for judgeson judicial thinking. Formal legal reasoning, is a necessary component of legal reasoning, ithas the characteristics of stability, certainty and predictability, can make people conscious,purposeful control their behaviour, so as to comply with the rule of law, not above the law.But every coin has two sides, the judge in the trial process if only used in formal legal reasoning is unscientific, as formal legal reasoning has its inevitable flaws and rigidity, lack ofreasoning functions. Meanwhile, the objective requirement of objective existence of difficultcases, the rules applicable, all kinds of new things and situations are constantly emerging,factors become more and more involved in legal reasoning, can no longer be had by purelylegal reasoning for the decision. Legal reasoning, it must be worth, must pass substantivelegal reasoning on judgments obtained formal legal reasoning to be supplemented to make itmore fair. Substantive legal reasoning to be able to break the shortsightedness of legalreasoning in the form of defects, more attention to legal values. Substantive legal reasoningon the substance of the law and the facts of the case for the appraised value of the reasoningand, in many cases, is to choose between conflicting interests. Pursuing legal adaptation to thecontemporary society, the pursuit of judicial legitimacy, acknowledged the judge’s discretion,to compensate for the deficiencies of statute lawAnd promoting judicial justice.In China, the judge’s legal reasoning has not been current law for judges to the statutoryobligation. Judges make judgments often seem overly simplistic, sometimes just a shortdescription: rehearse the Tribunal found that the main evidence and relevant legal provisions,and finally is on the Court’s verdict. Such a high-level overview of the decision, or lack ofreasoning analysis it is difficult to convince the parties of the case. Therefore, China shouldadopt legislation reasoning for the trial judge’s legal obligations under the law and through thejudicial document reform for judges to be spontaneously in the mind’s legal reasoning,rational thinking, consciously transformed into judgment with the clear, rigorousdemonstration of legal argument.