唐代司法官員的法律秩序觀－－以法典行用與斷案場域為中心

本文主題為唐代司法官員的法律秩序觀，透過「法典行用」與「斷案場域」為分析視角。所謂「法律秩序觀」，乃指法典體系下的理想秩序、斷案場域與「法」的運用、司法官員的法律見解與變通性。第一章緒論，說明本文的研究目的與概況。第二章「法典呈現的法律秩序觀」，闡明唐代法典的編纂與頒行，以唐律之篇章安排為主軸，討論國家統治藍圖如何呈現在法典上。唐代法律權威之始為唐高祖頒行《武德律令》，「寬減」與「取其便」的法律思維貫穿整部法典，並確立「律令格式」的法典體系。在面對不同時局的變動與困境之下，各朝皇帝也必須在法典內部作調整與刪修，刪修法典意味著唐代統治者對於法典落實的重視與實用性。在探討唐代法典的重要性與時代背景之後，試圖從法典建構的法律秩序觀轉向司法官員，集中於司法官員在懂法、學法、用法三方面所形成的法律秩序觀。第三章「唐代司法官員與法典運用」，界定司法官員的身分、法律知識的取得及運用，進而分析法典的落實面。首先，在司法官員身分方面，分成中央司法官員和地方官員兩類。所謂中央司法官員，即御史臺官員的司法監督、刑部官員掌天下法典、大理寺官員折獄詳刑。至於地方官員掌行政、司法等多項職責，如使職官員、州縣官員、州府之司法參軍與法曹、縣尉等。此外，唐代官員的法律知識背景影響到法典落實的狀況，他們結合法典內容，透過試判練習法律推理能力，並適時運用在司法審理上。司法官員必須懂法也要善用法，斷案依據除了《唐律疏議》，也可能須參考判例或案例集，如趙仁本編撰《法例》。唐高宗時期朝廷有意頒行《法例》，但高宗否決此項提議，不願更動唐初建立的律令格式體系，呈現出法典行用上的困境，這也說明了法典之外的「法」存在的可能性。第四章「中央司法官員的司法經驗與形象」，討論中央司法官員對於重大刑案與地方案件的態度，他們是中央依法斷案的權威代表。國家的擇才標準影響到官員司法形象的構成，強調他們必須是「公直良善」、「斷獄允當」、「法學素養」等特質，這些形象雖然是官方期待，卻使文本書寫與史實建構的過程中，形成潛移默化的效果。司法者形象的建構與他們親自處理的司法經驗有關，即平衡司法、依法論法的特點，尤以強調善用法典的特質，並且能在皇帝、權貴與官員之間找出平衡點。此外，中央司法官員的釋冤能力亦是重點，在許多唐代司法案例中，可發現絕大數的案例都與釋冤有關，釋冤是中央司法單位與地方官府的連結，透過審覆冤案與疑案，使其權威形象得以發揮。唐代官員在司法案件處理的期待與要求，主要和帝國法律體系的建立有關，即「依法斷罪」與「取證公正」的兩個要點。「取證」變成「釋冤」的致命一擊，意即取證不公會造成冤獄；相反地，取證公正且有技巧，則能平反冤獄，獲得斷獄允當的好名聲。第五章「地方官員的斷案場域與官民互動」，本文以《折獄龜鑑》為參考文本，也引用唐代墓誌、《太平廣記》、《兩唐書》、《唐會要》、《冊府元龜》、《大唐新語》等史料，補充司法案例的說明。從司法案例可知唐代地方官員在處理獄訟時，他們在斷案場域中如何和人民互動，尤其是針對案件當事人、官僚部屬之間的互動關係，或曉以大義，或善用法典斷案，或敏銳的辦案能力等，皆充分展現唐代地方官員與中央司法官員的差異。在官民的法律互動中，地方官員也可藉此建立良好名聲，此名聲是符合官方與大眾的期待。地方官員多涉及民事糾紛或人倫秩序，透過合理的推論與裁決，既可適當處理司法案件，亦代表官府在地方司法實務上的成效與名聲。綜合而言，唐代司法官員從最初法典理想秩序觀的展現，到國家編修與頒行法典，又將此法典與法律知識運用在自已身上，並在實際案例的審理過程，善用法典、依法論法、平衡司法、剛正不阿、釋冤等。在法典、法律知識與斷案場域三者之間，唐代司法官員逐步建構其自身的法律秩序觀。

關鍵字

唐代；司法官員；法典；司法審判；法律知識；法律互動

並列摘要

This paper discusses the legal order of Tang judicial officials by applying the concepts of practicing code and the judicial field. Legal order means the ideal order operated under the imperial code, its exertion in different judicial fields, and the flexibility of judicial officials’ personal interpretation, understanding, and utilization of the law. This paper is divided into four main parts. First, in the preface, I will provide a general view of the main objectives of this research project. The following chapter on legal code will offer a detailed discussion about how the Tang Code was compiled and enacted. I argue that early Tang lawmakers emphatically highlighted “dexterity” and “leniency.” The emphasis on these two concepts was already obvious in one of the dynasty’s earliest legal texts—The Wude Law. Tang emperors must also make changes either adding or deleting certain statutes within the dynastic code to accommodating with contemporary political situations. This is to say that the Tang rulers and lawmakers had put enormous emphases on the practicality of the code. The second part, which starts from “The Judicial Officials’ Operation of the Tang Code,” will shift to officials’ understanding, learning and practice of the law code. I aim to provide answers to how the officials defined their identities by applying and exerting legal knowledge. It is widely known that the judicial officials served at either the central court or local yamen. The so-called central legal officials included the censors (yushi御史) under the imperial censorate (yushitai御史臺), those from the Board of Punishment（xingbu 刑部）who handled with the code, and the Grand Court officials who meticulously reviewed and revised the law reports. Local offices were administered by military commissioners, judicial administrators, and prefectural and county magistrates. These officials were obliged to be familiar with the imperial code, and applying such knowledge to legal judgments by considering human sympathies (renqing) and appropriate reasons (li). However, the intricate situations of each legal case demanded a middle ground between the code and its actual practice. Hence, many officials who observed the inadequacy of the code insisted on the enactment of statutes. In this context, the actual practice of the imperial code appeared to be much more flexible than the code on paper. In the third part, “The experience and image of the central legal officials,” I examine the central officials’ attitude toward homicidal cases and local cases. To a certain extent, the central officials represented the authority of the imperial law. The state expected impartiality, kind-heartedness, and knowledge of the code when recruiting legal censors and judges. These characteristic did not only exist on paper. In reality, they had exerted significant influence on the image of the officials, and helping them to find a balance point between the interests of the emperor, the aristocrats, and the bureaucracy. Furthermore, many Tang officials had stressed over the ability of redressing injustices as a means to maintaining positive images. The Tang code, as I argue was built upon two fundamental principles—judge by law and impartial evidence. The latter had been closely associated with redressing injustices, which indicated that partial evidence could result in unjust punishments. Fourth, it examines the judicial field of the local officials and their interaction with the commoners. My main sources include the Collection of judging lawsuits (Zhe Yu Gui Jian折獄龜鑑), various epitaphs, Extensive Records of the Taiping Era, The Old Book of the Tang, The New Book of the Tang, Prime Tortoise of the Record Bureau, The New Anecdotes of Tang Dynasty and etc. I will focus on how local officials interacted with different parties involved within a legal suit and their subordinates. In such process, the local officials had to be adept of using knowledge and language that articulated the imperial law and Confucian morals to make judgments. This ability differentiated the local officials from the central officials as the former could establish great reputation among the commoners. This sort of reputation must also coincide with popular expectation of the commoners. Thence, at the local, the actual practice of the law was in a recursive relationship with the folk society. In short, the Tang judicial officials had transformed the ideal order envisioned by the imperial code to a much more practical means in actual judgments. This practice had significantly influenced the image-making of officials, as well as the legal order of the state. The officials were not only expected to be familiar with the code, but also to have the ability of dealing with various situations indifferent judicial fields, which in this case, included the code, legal knowledge, and the specific context of a lawsuit. It was such expectation that helped promote the popular image of a good, kind-hearted, and impartial official.

並列關鍵字

Tang Dynasty ； judicial officers ； code ； judicial trial ； legal knowledge ； legal interaction

參考文獻

王健文，《奉天承運——古代中國的「國家」概念及其正當性基礎》，臺北：東大書局，1995。

林學忠，《從萬國公法到公法外交：晚清國際法的傳入、詮釋與應用》，上海：上海古籍，2009。

胡滄澤，《唐代御史制度研究》，臺北：文津出版社，1993。

馬小紅撰，《中國古代社會的法律觀》，北京：大象出版社，1997。

陶希聖，《清代衙門刑事審判制度及程序》，臺北：食貨出版社，1972。

國際替代計量

唐代司法官員的法律秩序觀－－以法典行用與斷案場域為中心

主題瀏覽