摘要
类推与罪刑法定无疑是不相容的,但类推并非及于规范适用;它是一种特别的刑事司法制度,是一种制度化的刑法解释,有其独特的司法规范的制度机能。现行刑法司法解释制度及实践惯习,发端于旧刑法第79条与其第10条合并而建构的此制度规范;甚至还可以说全国人大常委会立法授权(1981年)"两高"可作刑法的司法解释,也与此制度早期实践中卓有成效有关。立法授权是制度化解释法律的合法性与正当性来源,但刑法司法解释的有效性与普遍接受性,在技术与规范及制度实践层面,则无疑受惠于此类推制度的实践,并且逐渐完全独立于此,形成自身坚实的规范性和实效性根基。不可否认,刑法司法解释无疑也是一种刑法解释,但较之于办案进程中,因应办案需要对刑法所作的解释有显著的差异;它的存在,实际上相当于将刑法司法过程中,需要解释的事实和法律问题,依体制性解释权限作了两分,即自主解释和司法解释,并且后者逐渐压窄自主解释的余地。现行刑法取消类推表述后,无碍于刑法司法解释制度及实践,其中以批复的形式针对具体案件所作的解释,依然具有类推制度的操作模式。运用刑法教义学(显然,这样的教义学范式无疑具有深厚的历史底蕴),逐一解析新中国各种有效的和非正式的刑法或刑事单行规范文本中,有关此比照或类推的表达,能够更加坚实地证立,当下方兴未艾的刑法司法解释制度与实践,与此制度有极强的亲缘关联。在大兴罪刑法定的今朝,如何理解刑法司法解释体制,作为一种刑事实体规范的次级供给渠道,是评价和省思罪刑法定在中国大地生根茁壮的一个关键性议题。通过教义学勾勒和表达,或许会对一些刑法学通识构成毁灭性冲击,以重构真正属于中国的刑法教义学及理论根基。
Analogy and crimes are undoubtedly incompatible,but analogy is not applicable to norms.It is a special criminal justice system and an institutionalized criminal law interpretation,haw ing its unique system of judicial norms.The current judicial interpretation system and practice habits of criminal law originated from the system norms constructed by the merger of Article 79 of the old Criminal Law and its Article 10.It can even be said that the National People’s Congress Standing Committee has authorized the legislation(1981)to be a criminal law.The explanation is also related to the effectiveness of the early practice of this system.Legislation authorization is the legality and legitimacy of institutionalized interpretation of law,but the validity and universal acceptance of judicial interpretation of criminal law,in the technical and normative and institutional practice level,undoubtedly benefit from the practice of such a system,and gradually complete Independent of this,it forms its own solid normative and effective foundation.It is undeniable that the judicial interpretation of criminal law is undoubtedly also a criminal law interpretation,but compared with the case handling case,there is a significant difference in the interpretation of the criminal law in response to the case;its existence is actually equivalent to the criminal law in the judicial process,which needs to be explained.The factual and legal issues are divided into two points according to the institutional interpretation authority,namely,self-interpretation and judicial interpretation,and the latter gradually narrows the scope of selfinterpretation.After the current criminal law cancels the analogy,it does not hinder the judicial interpretation system and practice of criminal law.The interpretation of specific cases in the form of approval still has an analogy system.Using criminal law doctrine(obviously,such a doctrine paradigm undoubtedly has a profound historical connotation),one by one to analyze the various effective and informal criminal law or criminal single-line normative texts of New China,and the expression of this comparison or analogy can be more Solidly exemplified,when the underexcited criminal law judicial interpretation system and practice,there is a strong affinity with this system.In the current Daxing crimes,how to understand the judicial interpretation system of criminal law,as a secondary supply channel for criminal entity regulation,is a key issue for evaluating and pondering the legality of crimes in China.Through the outline and expression of doctrine,it may constitute a devastating impact on some criminal law general knowledge,in order to reconstruct the criminal law doctrine and theoretical foundation that truly belongs to China.
出处
《刑法论丛》
2020年第1期104-139,共36页
Criminal Law Review
基金
江西省2018年度高校人文社会科学研究一般项目“刑法上‘其他’及司法中扩充研究”的阶段性成果
关键词
刑法司法解释
解释分权
批复与类推制度
刑法教义学
历史维度
Judicial Interpretation of Criminal Law
Interpretation of Decentralization
Approval and Analogy System
Criminal Law Teaching
