实质解释论的应用风险与应对

发布时间：2018-01-31 02:03

本文关键词： 实质解释刑法解释合法性能动司法　出处：《江西社会科学》2015年10期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：实质解释在我国刑事司法实践中被广泛适用。然而,该解释方法的过分能动却破坏着审判解释的独立性、刑法解释的保守性和刑法规范的有效性。这种破坏性作用侵蚀了刑法解释的正当性和合法性,导致国家最终难以通过司法解释实现有效的犯罪治理。为了应对和化解这些风险,应以"有限能动"为根本指导思路,以法治手段实现犯罪治理。具体而言,则要坚持刑法解释理念的理性均衡,重塑司法解释的裁判属性,保证权力运作的对外开放。
[Abstract]:Substantive interpretation is widely used in our country's criminal judicial practice. However, the excessive initiative of the interpretation method undermines the independence of trial interpretation. The conservatism of the interpretation of criminal law and the validity of the norms of criminal law have eroded the legitimacy and legitimacy of the interpretation of criminal law. In order to deal with and resolve these risks, we should take "limited initiative" as the basic guiding thinking, and realize the crime governance by means of the rule of law. Specifically, it is difficult for the state to achieve effective crime governance through judicial interpretation. Then we should insist on the rational balance of the concept of criminal law interpretation, reshape the judicial interpretation's adjudicative attribute, and ensure the opening of the power to the outside world.
【作者单位】：北京师范大学刑事法律科学研究院;
【基金】：国家社会科学基金项目“我国刑事司法对刑法基本原则的挑战与应对”(11BFX130)
【分类号】：D924
【正文快照】： 在刑事法领域,尽管在理论层面上,实质解一、实质解释论在刑事司法领域的运用状释论与形式解释论仍然各执己见,没有哪一方况占据明显优势的地位,但在司法实务中,实质解刑法解释活动可以视为通过刑法规范对事释论由于具有较强的灵活性,满足了国家保护实进行评价的过程,它天然需

【参考文献】