Trust and Authority
Trust and Authority
复制标题
信任与权威
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2019
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Evan Fox
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Evan Fox
一些法官和学者认为，在法律的范围内，在法律的框架之间，只有一个法律的空白，一个法律缺席的领域。我质疑法律的无效论，认为法律在法律创造的空间内运作。我认为，法律通过拥有和维护合法的权威，管理着存在于法律的范围内和跨越框架的间隙空间。重要的是，它在空间上无缝的合法权威主张依赖于立法者和法律的主体之间的相互信任关系。
这一论点首先阐述了决策实体的授权（即导致其拥有权力的过程）与其权力本身（即其法律的权力的性质和效力）之间的区别。下一节以授权/权威的区别为基础，通过托马斯霍布斯的著作介绍相互信任的概念。霍布斯认为，公共权威可以被理解为产生于一个原始的契约，所有臣民都同意这个契约，通过这个契约，主权者开始享有臣民的授权。然而，一旦法律的制度到位，霍布斯倾向于使用信任的语言来描述主权和其他公职人员的地位。霍布斯认为，成为臣民而不是被俘虏的奴隶的可能性，取决于君主对臣民的自由信任，从而使君主与臣民之间的信任关系是相互的。本文的后半部分概述了我所依赖的信任的概念，并解释了相互信任如何告知法律的权威，使法律可以被理解为渗透到它为臣民和官员的自由创造的空间。
Some judges and scholars hold that within legal limits and across legal frameworks, there is just a legal void, a domain in which law is absent. I challenge the legal void thesis, arguing that law operates within the spaces law creates. Law governs the interstitial spaces that exist within legal limits and across frameworks, I claim, through its possession and assertion of legitimate authority. Importantly, its spatially seamless assertion of legitimate authority relies on a relationship of mutual trust between law-giver and legal subject.
The argument begins by setting out the distinction between a decision-making entity’s authorization (ie, the process that led to it having authority) and its authority per se (ie, the nature and effects of its legal power). The next section builds on the authorization/authority distinction and introduces the idea of mutual trust through the writings of Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes suggests that public authority may be understood to have arisen from an original covenant to which all subjects consent and by which the sovereign comes to enjoy the subjects’ authorization. Yet once legal institutions are in place, Hobbes tends to use the language of trust to characterize the position of the sovereign and other public officials. And, Hobbes thinks the very possibility of being a subject rather than a captive slave depends on the sovereign trusting the subject with liberty, thus making the trust relationship between sovereign and subject mutual. The second half of the paper sketches the conception of trust on which I rely, and explains how mutual trust informs law’s authority such that law can be understood to pervade the spaces it creates for the liberty of its subjects and officials.