刑法解释中有利于被告人原则之证否

发布时间：2018-03-14 12:50

本文选题：存疑有利于被告　切入点：刑法解释　出处：《政治与法律》2017年06期 　论文类型：期刊论文

【摘要】：德国联邦普通法院通过判例确认,存疑时有利于被告人之原则仅适用于事实之疑问,而不适用于法律之存疑。刑法解释中有利于被告人解释这一原则,实际上就是存疑时有利于被告人原则的简称。罪疑唯轻原则系以作为刑事实体法适用前提的事实不清为基础,与刑事诉讼之证明不可分离,而所谓的法律存疑,本质上是指法律语词的多义性,而与自然事实向法律事实之飞跃无关。罪刑法定原则和责任主义原则均要求刑法解释应当在语词的可能含义范围内进行,而不必受限于核心语义范围内。有利于被告之类推,以违背"计划的立法漏洞"为适用前提,且以法律未予规定情形与法定情形的相似性为实质理由;有利于被告之溯及既往,则以一般预防必要性之消解为依据。故无法从罪刑法定原则与责任主义原则中导出刑法解释应遵从有利于被告原则的结论。
[Abstract]:The German federal court rulings by the ordinary confirmed doubts in favor of the defendant's principle applies only to the fact that the question, but not applicable to legal doubt. The interpretation of criminal law in favor of the defendant to explain this principle is actually a doubt in principle in favor of the defendant. The abbreviation of REO system as applicable the premise of substantive criminal law unclear facts as the basis, not with the criminal proof of separation, the so-called law of doubt, is the essence of legal polysemy words, and unrelated to the legal facts of the natural facts leap. The principle of legality and responsibility principle require interpretation of criminal law should be in the range of possible meaning in a word, without being limited by the core semantic range. For the defendant, to push against the "loopholes" plan for the application of the premise, and the law has not been specified and the legal situation Similarity is a substantial reason; it is conducive to the defendant's retroactive effect, which is based on the elimination of the necessity of general prevention. Therefore, it can not be deduced from the principle of legality and the principle of responsibility. The conclusion of criminal law should comply with the principle of defendant.

【作者单位】：复旦大学法学院;
【分类号】：D924.1

【相似文献】