从特别减轻到违宪审查——以许霆案为样本的分析  

From Special Mitigation to Unconstitutional Censorship: Taking Xu Ting Case as an Example

作　　者：叶良芳[1] 

机构地区：[1]浙江大学光华法学院,浙江杭州310008

出　　处：《华南理工大学学报（社会科学版）》2011年第5期32-38,共7页Journal of South China University of Technology(Social Science Edition)

基　　金：国家"211工程"三期重点学科建设项目:"转型期法治的理论;制度与实证研究"阶段性成果之一(203000-123210301)

摘　　要：许霆案的初审判决,基本上是一个严格规则主义的判决。其之所以演变成为一个公共事件,完全是律师的专业运作、学者的推波助澜、民意的偏执率性对司法裁决共同夹击所致。本案的重审判决,在事实和定性不变的情况下,适用刑法第63条规定的特别减轻制度,将初审的量刑结果进行了大幅度的削减。这一做法虽然满足了民众的隐性期望,却损害了刑事法治的应有权威,更显现不受羁束的刑事自由裁量权的可怕威力。事实上,许霆案的症结,不在司法层面,而在立法层面。因此,求诸于刑法中的特别减刑制度,并不能为解决类似案件提供一个可行的方案。只有建立常规性的违宪审查制度,对刑事立法规范进行合宪性审查,才能彻底解决因"立法不公"而导致的"司法不公"问题。The initial verdict of XU Ting case is a judgment of strict legalism.The reason that it evolves into a public event is the joint attacks of some lawyers,scholars and the public.The retrial verdict applies the special mitigation system which is stipulated in clause 63 of Criminal Law of China and reduces the initial sentence of life imprisonment to five years imprisonment,with the same facts and same crime which is affirmed in the initial verdict.Although the retrial verdict meets the expectations of the public,it has damaged judicial authority immeasurably.Besides,it shows the terrible consequence of untied discretion power.In fact,the crux of the case does not lie in judiciary,but in legislation.Therefore,the special mitigation system can not provide us a feasible scheme for solving the cases alike.Only by establishing regular constitutional review can we completely solve the problem of judicial injustice which derives form legislation injustice.

关 键 词：许霆案 严格规则主义 自由裁量权 特别减轻 违宪审查 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学]