Procedural Law Theory - An inquiry into the different approaches to analyse legal rules of preocedure

(1)本书分为两部分，第一部分涉及科学哲学，因为它与程序法研究有关。它分析了在这方面可以进行哪些不同的研究问题。除了(程序性的)法律教条学，它可以被定义为从法院和其他实践律师的角度研究法律，以期将法律规则应用于个别案件，其他研究问题也是可能的，确实可以在学术界找到。对于这些其他问题，术语“程序法理论”(Verfahrenstheorie)应运而生。程序法理论中那些针对法律规范而不是经验事实的问题在这里被描述为一个可区分的研究领域，被称为“司法程序法理论”。这些问题值得进一步研究。当规范被置于语境中并被解释为其意义时，它就是法律理论；这样，法律理论就到达了法律教条学既不能感知也不能讨论的意义和价值的地平线，因为它不超越规范的应用维度。因此，在程序法研究中，法学理论既可以作为反思的学科，也可以作为学科的接力器，因为它提供了连接相关但不同的学术领域的机会。如果以及在多大程度上，跨学科在法律学术中是可能的，以及在多大程度上，这一概念可以帮助回答这个被广泛讨论的问题。(2)该书的第二部分深入探讨了司法程序法理论的实质，并试图绘制出任何非教条主义的程序规范方法可能想要研究的问题。这一尝试并不直接采用将程序规则集作为一个整体加以描述的传统理论概念(如“程序原则”[Verfahrensmax]、“程序目的”)；相反，图表遵循了这些规则集通常涉及的程序的不同方面。诉讼主体(如法院)及其内部结构、程序内事件的先后顺序和参与者的角色是本文讨论的三个主要主题。在这三个领域中，司法程序法理论作为反思学科和学科接力器的潜力，体现在程序法通常所规定的许多问题上。这里可以特别指出的是，实际决策的程序法要求(例如，使用司法或非司法标准；有或没有自由裁量权)与法律理论的核心概念密切相关。再举一个例子，口头听证以其典型的意象和象征意义(如法庭上严格的座位安排、礼服、正式的演讲)可能与他们通过文化研究给出的解释有关。

(1) The book falls into two parts, the first of which deals with philosophy of science as it relates to the study of procedural law. It analyses what different research questions can be pursued in this regard. Besides (procedural-)legal dogmatics, which can be defined as the study of law from the perspective of courts and other practical lawyers with a view to applying legal rules to individual cases, other research questions are also possible, and indeed to be found in academia. For these other questions, the term "Procedural Law Theory" (Verfahrenstheorie) is coined. Those questions within Procedural Law Theory that aim at legal norms rather than at empirical facts are described here as a distinguishable field of study, to be called "juridical Procedural Law Theory". These questions deserve additional studying. It is Juridical Theory when norms are put into contexts and interpreted as to their meaning; that way, Juridical Theory arrives at horizons of meaning and valuations that legal dogmatics can neither perceive nor discuss as it does not look beyond the applicative dimension of norms. Within the study of procedural law, therefore, Juridical Theory can function as a discipline of reflection as well as a discipline-relay because it provides opportunities to connect to related but distinct academic fields. This concept can help answer the much-discussed question if, and to what extent, interdisciplinarity is possible in legal scholarship. (2) The second part of the book dives into the substance of Juridical Procedural Law Theory and attempts to chart the issues that any non-dogmatical approach to procedural norms might want to study. This attempt does not directly pick up the traditional theoretical concepts describing procedural rule-sets as a whole (like "principles of procedure" [Verfahrensmaximen], "purposes of procedure"); rather, the charting follows the different aspects of procedure that such rule-sets would normally be about. The proceeding bodies (such as courts) and their internal structure, the sequence of events within a procedure, and the role of participants therein are the three main topics addressed here.Within these three fields, the potential of juridical Procedural Law Theory as a discipline of reflection and as a discipline-relay is exemplified by a plurality of issues normally regulated by procedural law. Here it can be specifically noted that procedural-law requirements for the actual decision-making (e.g., with a juridical or non-juridical standard; with or without discretion) are closely connected to central concepts of legal theory. With another example, oral hearings with their typical imagery and symbolism (like the strict arrangement of seating in a courtroom, the gowns, the formalised speech) can be related to interpretations they have been given by cultural studies.