On Judicial Legitimacy And Legal Discourse

Through the analysis of contemporary political, social status, judicial status and views from various viewing angles of jurisprudence, this paper established the subject of judicial legitimacy ,which was illustrated from a normative perspective.The history of the concept of legitimacy provides the inspiration: the contemporary evidence of judicial legitimacy should not be biased in favor of standards or ethics of metaphysics, but should be reconstructed based on the legitimacy of ethical discourse. Thus, judicial legitimacy requires legal argument as the core of discourses of application as the method to achieve legitimacy. During application of the law, judicial legitimacy and rationality of the decree referees closely: on the one hand, legitimacy based on the judgments self-consistent and rational acceptability and can be achieved; the other hand, rationality itself has a the legitimacy of political load.The process of argumentation in the law, through the Perspective of interaction, debate parties continue to exchange reasons, handling objections, thereby reducing the risk of judicial challenge areas, fit the basic structure of the legitimacy and consent through the reasonable pursuit of a certain degree of justice to restore basic logic as the "tripartite structure."When legal argument as the core of the legal discussions is in the coherence of all the arguments will come to an end.However, due to the requirements of ideal discourse is too high, which tends to infinite in space and time extension, the reality of the legal discussion is placed within the framework of the institutionalized legal legal procedure, subject to various restrictions, which have a reality.Due to the ideal type of legal discourse, there are possibilities that legal practice to discourse challenged by the problem of the costs, but because of the legal discourse from the beginning to discuss the normative conclusion is embedded in the law being formed, so the cost of most of the discussions have been litigation costs are absorbed. Legal discussions in the judicial practice of contemporary Chinas most important manifestation is argument and reasoning on the decision. In the perspective of legitimacy, it can be found that not only fully demonstrated of judgment brings good results with some value, but also deduces the principles of law the referees performance obligations.And this obligation points to the content of the argument ,which makes judge discretion in hard cases are bound to pursue the legal interpretation of the perspective of those who judge the Sole Accurate Answer. Obligation of the judges argument embodies the reasoning in the judgments, and judgments of judicial reform, reform is not the most controversial and most feasible one. Judicial reform in contemporary China, whether professional or democratic road routes are seeking to dominate power of judicial independence in order to achieve its basic social function, but should not be considered a strategic nature and duties of the Legitimacy of the phase contradictions can not be justified with the core of the realization of judicial procedure - in contradiction of legal argumentation. Based on this, legal discourse theory provides a new perspective of the legitimacy and public opinion to deal with the problem of justice and provide a solution.