刑事指导案例与刑法知识体系的更新

发布时间：2018-04-05 20:11

本文选题：指导性　切入点：案例　出处：《政治与法律》2015年04期

【摘要】：案例指导制度被赋予了极高的并且多重性的意义。然而,其并不直接有助于"同案同判",并不必然导致司法效率的提高,也并不能自然促进司法公正的实现。通过已经推出的刑事指导性案例分析可以发现:如何避免武断化的刑事个案指导与刑事案例指导制度的武断化才是最关键的。刑事指导性案例不应被附着太多的社会意义,不能被作为一种判决宣示(与犯罪作斗争的态度)和满足于提供一种简单的结论性标准,而是应当进行充分的说理,从而避免案例的指导性归于沉寂。作为刑事指导案例,在遵循罪刑法定原则的基础上,应当侧重于例外性、补充性规则的形成和对平衡性的追求,以此促进司法理念与刑法知识体系的更新。
[Abstract]:The case guidance system is endowed with extremely high and multiple meanings.However, it does not directly contribute to "co-adjudication", does not necessarily lead to the improvement of judicial efficiency, nor can it naturally promote the realization of judicial justice.Through the analysis of the criminal guidance case, we can find that how to avoid the arbitrary criminal case guidance and the criminal case guidance system is the most critical.Criminal guidance cases should not be attached to too much social significance, nor can they be declared as a judgment (attitude to fight crime) and satisfied with a simple standard of conclusion, but should be fully reasoned,In order to avoid the guidance of the case into silence.As a criminal guidance case, on the basis of following the principle of legally prescribed punishment for a crime, we should focus on the exception, the formation of supplementary rules and the pursuit of balance, so as to promote the updating of the judicial concept and the knowledge system of criminal law.
【作者单位】：华东政法大学法律学院;
【基金】：国家社科基金项目“犯罪治理控制与刑事司法犯罪化的反思”(项目号:11BFX102)、国家社科基金重大项目“涉信息网络违法犯罪问题研究”(项目编号:14ZDB147) 上海市高校一流学科(法学)建设计划的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D924

【参考文献】