在蠣合社會與法律的鴨溝上，法官必須考應到司法的制度限制。毋 庸置疑地，多數透過解釋所進石的可法造法是最高法院角色的核心，但 此一角色是隨們於爭訟之解決。這和司法造法與幸ú訂法律法有很大的不 同。無爭訟{更無司法的法律制定。本質上，法，百創造法律是偶發的，無
規律性的。法官對法律的改變是局部的，有限的及被動的。法庭前進f子 的爭訟在某種程度士。是隨意選擇的。在一個國接公畏的開題進入可法場 域之前，時間日過多年 O 法院審理家件是治極的，而且不想審理之案件 可加以駁回。囡此，法官不能擬定彌合法律和社會鶴溝的策略性計畫。
法官對法律所造成之變動是馬部的，是有i垠的。倘若法律需嬰全百及立 即的變吏，唐、自立法部門來執行。
102 美國聯邦最高;去~Jt2001 期導論去官吉利寞;民 制中最高法院之角色
P.33
Moreover, one cannot bridge the gap between society and law without having reliable information about society. The court does not always have the ínformatíon about social facts that might justify a change in the law. Our laws of evidence usually look backward (adjudicative facts), providing a (partial) answer to the question of "what happened." They usually do not look forward (legislative facts), and do not províde an answer to the question of
“
what should happen." Moreover, the means at a judge 冶 disposal are limited. The court may, in 技eveloping the common law in its legal system, ìmpose a new duty of care in torts. But ìt cannot, for example, impose taxes or establish a licensing regime.Fínally, the nature of the legal policy underlying existing la汰I should be a factor in the judge 可 wìllingness to change the law. For example, a judge is generally qualified to consider the legal policy underlyín在 human rights protections. N位urally， he or she has little difficulty evaluating le皂al policy that can be derived from log話， a sense of justice, or existing law (enacted or case law). By contrast, a judge should beware evaluating complex polycentric question of economic or social policy that require specialized expertise and knowledge and that m乳y rely on assumptions concerning issues with which he or she is unfamilüu. 1 紋m aware of the difficu制的 mm仇king this distinctìon. 1 mean to say only that a judge should be sensitive to this type of consideration.
1 feel much more comfortable holding that one economic plan is discriminatory compared to another than 1 do holding that one economic plan falls with的 therange of reasonableness whíle another does not.
成治學學報第五期 2005 年 8 月 1 閃 103
33 問況，要報告、法律和社會之闊的鴻溝需要有可靠的社會驚語。
並非總是有可靠的社會資訊，足以讓法律的警還具有正當理由。我們的 法律通常是向後看的(與;史事實) ，且軒扭了事情的真相;只提供了部分答
。它們通常不是向前者的(立法事實) ，並不提供 f 應該發生丹麼? J 的 答案。此外，法官解決問題的方法是有|垠的。在法律體系發展普通法通 程中，法院可能會在侵樁案件中科以軒增的注意義窮。但是在類似課稅 或發行證照業務時，上述行為則不為所詐。
，現行法律之下的法律政策的性塹，應該是法官有意改變法律
。例如:一能認為法會插手言有資格基於人權保歸來檢靚可
。當然，法宮在評估依躍輯推論、正義感或琨行法律(特別法著對例
法)所形成之苛法政策，幾無困難。相對地，法官在評估需脊特殊專業與 知識且聽複雜多元問題之經濟成社會政策，或法宵所不熟悉的有
時，應該留心。我認為在區別上有其困難，但我的本意只是提醒法官對 於類此考慮應該要敏感些。本人比較樂於判決某神經濟三十畫相對於其他 經濟計畫而言是否有歧觀?哇，比較不喜歡判決哪一聽經濟計畫是否具有 合理性。
104 美國聯邦最高法院 2001 :法官 2平核:民?全體制中最高法|早已之角 ê
4. Considerations of the Perception of the Judicial Role. 一 judicial
lawmaking that bridges the gap between law and society mus1 be consistent n01 only with society's basic values、 but also with society's fundamental perception of the role of the judiciary. The power of 況 jud部 10 bridge the gap
betw如n law and society in a society that, like Montesquieu, sees the judge merely as the mouthpiece of the legislature is different from the judge's power in a society that views comprehensive judicial lawmakin惡的 legitimate‘
Society's perception of the judicial role、 however， is flui試 ludicial activity is not only influenced by it; it also influences that perception.
P.34
In common law 可 stems， brid辜的g the gap between law and society appears to be a central role of the judiciary. By their nature‘ common law systems view the judge as 犯 semor 如此ner in lawmaking. But does this perception apply beyond the confines of the common law? And, in common law systems, is it possible to regard the judge as someone who ought 10 bridge the gap between law and society in the sphere of legislature? Certainly the main actor in this bridging is the legislature. Its democratic nature (in the sense of its being chosen by the people), the too)s at its disposal, and the ways in which it receives information about different policies and different alternati ves all m總e the legislature chiefly responsible for bridgin在 the gap between law and society.
政治學學報第五期 2005 年 8 月 1 El 105
(四)司法角色認知的考量
?最合法律和社會間的鴻溝之司法法律制定，
本價值，啦 Jfl[;符合社會對司法角色的基本認知。在社會上，法官在彌合
法律和社會闊的鴻溝之權力，就像孟德斯鳩，只是將法官當做立法部門 的代言人。這與認定法，百有進行全區，誰可法法律能定之正當權力，有所 不同 G 然而，社會對司法角位的認知是易蠻的 c 司法活動不只是受乞影
響;它申影響了認知。
34 在哲學海法的體系中，司法官的主要角色是聽合法律和社會問的鴻溝 O 在此J[在質下 2 菁通法體系說法官為制定法律的資深伙伴。但是，這樣的 認知超出普通法通用限制之外嗎?需且，在普通法體系中，法官有可能
被提為有能力在立法領域中彌合法律和社會間的鴻溝嗎?當然， 5自1合的 主要行動者是立法機廳 O 它的民主特性(指它的民還特性) ，它可支配的
，以及它接收不同政策與不用替代方案的資訊熙攘用 都使立法機鷗在曬合法律和社會之間的鴻溝時，
106 美國聯邦最高法院 2001 年庭期導論:法官評核:氏主體制中最高法院之角色
But can the judge be reco路口Ìzedas junior partner ín such bridging because of his role as the interpreter of legislation? The answer to this question is not at all simple. The questíon ís whether to accept a model of partnership-albeit a limited partnership- or a model of agency. According to the agency model, the judge is an agent of the legislature. He or she must act according to its instructions, like a junior officer bound to carry out the orders of his or her superior officer.τhere are many problems with this approach. To my mind ， β
judge is not an agent who receives order, and the legislature is not a príncipal that gives orders to its ager哎. The two are branches of the state with different role: one is legislator and the other is interpreter. Indeed、 legislatures create statutes that 我re supposed to bridge the gap between law and society. In bridging thìs 拉汶p，the legislature is the senior partner, for it created the S1為1ute.
But the statute i1self cannot be implemented without bein惡 ínterpreted.
P.35
The task of interpreting belongs to the judge. Through his or her interpretation, a judge must give effect to the purpose of the law and ensure that the law in fact brid囂的 the gap between law and society. The judge is a partner in the leεislatu話 's cr叫tionand ímplementation of statutes, even if this partnership is a limited one
政治學學校第五期 2005 年 8 月 1 日 107
然而，是否因為法官扮演立法者的詮釋角色，說可以將能認為是資 潰的伙伴嗎?此一問題之答案並不模單。問題在於'是接受伏伴關保模 式(即使是一一個有限的伙伴關係)或代理關係模式 G 根據代理關{芳:模式，
是立法機關的代理人，法官必須依據立法機關的法令行事 O 這就像 是一個資淺的公務員有義務執行資深公務員的命令一般。這樣的提議存 在著許多問題。依我之兒，法宮不是承受命令的代理人，立法機關也不 是將其命令賦予代理人。這兩但國家部門粉演著不悶的角色:一是立法 者時另一輯是詮釋者。的確，立法機關創造法規被認為是在彌合法律和 社會之間的鴻溝。在禪合此…鴻溝的過程中，立法機關是資深的仗伴，
因為它對違法規。但是，法規若不經詮釋便無法實踐，時解釋法律的責 任其Ij落在法官身上。
35
藉由法宮的解釋，法官必須讓法律的目的生效，以確保法律能在實 際上禪合社會與法律的差距 o 法官是立法機關創造法律和實行法規的夥 伴， {鑫管這樣的夥伴關係是有!垠的 O108 美國聯邦最高法說 2001 年庭期 :法1f評核:氏主體制中最高法院之角色
Regarding the jud怠e merely as an agent is too narrow an approach. That point of view 詣。lates a particular statute and sees it as an island. But a statute is not an island. It is part of a legislative enterp付給自治t Ìs many years old.
Moreover, legislation吟 together with the common law, forms part of the le惡al
system. All parts of the law are linked. Whoever interprets one statute interprets all the statutes. Whoever enforces one statute enforces the whole legal system. Normative harmony must exist among the different parts of the legal system. An interpretation of an individual statute consiste前ly with the whole system and ensure that the interpretation succeeds in bridgi時 the gap between law and life. From this perspective, the judge's role in creating common law (as 泛 senior partne吟詩 similar to the judge 冶 role in interpreting legislation (as a junior partner). In both cases, the judge works in the interstices of legislation. Of course, he or she has a different degree of freedom in each situatio丸 but hìs or her role is primarily the same: to bridge the gap between law and society.
P.36
A judge must therefore consider the elements discussed above •… the need to guarantee stability through change and to take systemic and institutional considerations into account一 in bridging the gap between law and socíety, both by creating common law and by ínterpreting legisl 滋IOn.
This approach directly impacts the impacts the formation of a proper system of interpretation. It shoul社 be a system that bridges law and society's needs. It should be a system that ensures dynamic interpretation，皂iving a statute a meaning compatible with social life in the present and, as far as can be anticipated, in the future, too.
政治學學報第三期 2005 年 8 月 1 日 109
將法官蔚為只是一位代理者是過於狹隘的想法。這樣的觀點會讓個 之法令處於恕立狀態，見其為荒島，祖國家並非荒島。個別法令是法 律體系之一古巴分，早已行之有年 O 出且制定法與普通法皆是構成法律系 統的一部分。法律各部分之間是相互聯結的。不論是誰在執行法令，都
等於在實行整個法律體系。規範的…致性必須存在於法律體系的不問層 O 個別法規的話釋，就像~--f胃新的普通法規則，品須整合進聲個法律 體系。法官對此負責 c 法官~以符合整個法律體系之方式解釋個別法規，
並且確保該解釋能夠成功彌合法律與生活的鴻溝。從這@J觀點看來，法 官在前設普通法的角色(扮慎資深的伙伴)與法官解釋法律的角色相似 (扮演資淺的伙伴)。在兩個案例中，法官在立法的空隙當中運作。當然，
法官在不同 'f育提下有不問程度的自由，但他們的角色基本上還是相同:
即彌合法律與社會的鴻溝。
36 間吐，法當同時紹自創設普通法與解時法律來彌合法律與社會的轉 i轉時，必三真對上述各種民素甜以考量一紹自雙邊確保穩定以及將體系與 制度的因素列入考量。這個途種直接影響到適當詮釋系統的影成， !tt一 系統應符合彌合法律與社會之需要。它應該也是一個?能確保動態、解釋、
賦予法規意義使其能適用於常前社會生活與可頓期之未來」的系缸。(一F 黯待續)