CAJ | 학술논문

法律制度正当性的阐释大体上可以分为形式主义和实用主义两条路径。法律实用主义可以很好地解释对羁押必要性进行审查的内在法理。本质在于，由中立司法官对羁押必要性加以审查，严格限制羁押适用，在实现普遍正义的同时，亦能关注个案公正。《刑事诉讼法》对逮捕后继续羁押必要性的审查作了规定，但内容较为概括和原则，应当对羁押必要性审查的启动方式、审查主体、审查程序和方法、审查后的处理与救济等作出细化规定，以便司法实践中具体应用。
법률제도정당성적천석대체상가이분위형식주의화실용주의량조로경。법률실용주의가이흔호지해석대기압필요성진행심사적내재법리。본질재우，유중립사법관대기압필요성가이심사，엄격한제기압괄용，재실현보편정의적동시，역능관주개안공정。《형사소송법》대체포후계속기압필요성적심사작료규정，단내용교위개괄화원칙，응당대기압필요성심사적계동방식、심사주체、심사정서화방법、심사후적처리여구제등작출세화규정，이편사법실천중구체응용。
The theoretical explanation of legitimacy of the legal institutions includes two paths of formalism and pragmatism. Legal pragmatism can well illustrate the juristic basis of reviewing the necessity of detention coercive measures. The substance of this system is the review of the necessity and justice basis for detention coercive measure by neutral judicial ofricer so as to limit the application of detention measures and to pay more attention to individual justice while achieving general justice. The newly revised Criminal Procedure Law has stipulated the review mechanism of the necessity for detention, but more principles and concreted contents should be further refined in order to make the legal provision more feasible in practice.