现代法学
現代法學
현대법학
Modern Law Science
2015年
3期
137~150
,共null页
刑法 合宪性解释 罪刑法定主义 解释限度 解释方法
刑法 閤憲性解釋 罪刑法定主義 解釋限度 解釋方法
형법 합헌성해석 죄형법정주의 해석한도 해석방법
criminal law;constitutional interpretation;the doctrine of nulla poena sine lege;interpreting limit;interpretation methods
从宪法与刑法的关系、近代刑法产生与发展的过程以及国外刑法理论对合宪性解释的解释来看,刑法的合宪性解释是指对刑法做出合乎罪刑法定原则的解释。提倡合宪性解释,对刑法领域法治的实现、划定刑法解释的界限以及厘定刑法理论的发展方向,均具有重要意义。合宪性解释是一种解释限度,而非具体的刑法解释方法,但对刑法解释方法构成了明显的制约。合宪性解释应当在所有的刑法解释方法中得到贯彻,因而与刑法解释方法之间不存在位阶关系;而且,从逻辑和解释实践来看,刑法解释方法之间也不存在位阶关系。在形式上,对刑法做出未超出文义范围的解释结论就满足了合宪性解释的要求;从实质上看,合宪性解释的贯彻还得借助于体系解释、历史解释、目的解释等刑法解释方法的具体运用。
從憲法與刑法的關繫、近代刑法產生與髮展的過程以及國外刑法理論對閤憲性解釋的解釋來看,刑法的閤憲性解釋是指對刑法做齣閤乎罪刑法定原則的解釋。提倡閤憲性解釋,對刑法領域法治的實現、劃定刑法解釋的界限以及釐定刑法理論的髮展方嚮,均具有重要意義。閤憲性解釋是一種解釋限度,而非具體的刑法解釋方法,但對刑法解釋方法構成瞭明顯的製約。閤憲性解釋應噹在所有的刑法解釋方法中得到貫徹,因而與刑法解釋方法之間不存在位階關繫;而且,從邏輯和解釋實踐來看,刑法解釋方法之間也不存在位階關繫。在形式上,對刑法做齣未超齣文義範圍的解釋結論就滿足瞭閤憲性解釋的要求;從實質上看,閤憲性解釋的貫徹還得藉助于體繫解釋、歷史解釋、目的解釋等刑法解釋方法的具體運用。
종헌법여형법적관계、근대형법산생여발전적과정이급국외형법이론대합헌성해석적해석래간,형법적합헌성해석시지대형법주출합호죄형법정원칙적해석。제창합헌성해석,대형법영역법치적실현、화정형법해석적계한이급전정형법이론적발전방향,균구유중요의의。합헌성해석시일충해석한도,이비구체적형법해석방법,단대형법해석방법구성료명현적제약。합헌성해석응당재소유적형법해석방법중득도관철,인이여형법해석방법지간불존재위계관계;이차,종라집화해석실천래간,형법해석방법지간야불존재위계관계。재형식상,대형법주출미초출문의범위적해석결론취만족료합헌성해석적요구;종실질상간,합헌성해석적관철환득차조우체계해석、역사해석、목적해석등형법해석방법적구체운용。
Looking from the relationship between constitutional law and criminal law,the emergence and development of modern criminal law and the explanation to constitutional interpretation to criminal law in foreign criminal theories,the constitutional interpretation to criminal law refers to interpreting criminal law in line with the principle of nulla poena sine lege. Advocating constitutional interpretation to criminal law is significant to achieving rule of law in criminal field,delineating the boundaries to interpreting criminal law and stipulating the developing direction of criminal theory. The constitutional interpretation to criminal law is a limitation to interpreting criminal law,not a specific interpretation method. But it constrains interpretation methods of criminal law effectively. The constitutional interpretation to criminal law should be implemented in all interpretation methods of criminal law. As a result,there is not hierarchical relation between constitutional interpretation to criminal law and interpretation methods of criminal law. Moreover,in logic and practice of interpreting criminal law,there is not hierarchical relation among interpretation methods of criminal law. In form,making interpreting conclusion within the scope of literal meanings does conform to constitutional interpretation to criminal law;in essence,implementing constitutional interpretation to criminal law must utilize specifically other interpretation methods of criminal law,such as systematical interpretation,historical interpretation,purposeful interpretation,etc.
