案例指导制度与故意杀人罪的死刑裁量  

The Case Guidance System and the Death Penalty Discretion in Cases of Intentional Homicide

作　　者：付立庆[1] 

机构地区：[1]中国人民大学刑事法律科学研究中心

出　　处：《环球法律评论》2018年第3期19-39,共21页Global Law Review

摘　　要：最高人民法院针对故意杀人罪所公布的两个指导案例,对于该罪的死刑裁量具有重要指导意义。学界针对这两个指导案例的一些质疑值得商榷,其"纠偏"意义不容抹杀,且正逐渐得到实践的验证。故意杀人罪中,被害人亲属不予谅解、手段是否残忍的判断标准以及被告人亲属协助抓捕且被告人未反抗抓捕三个因素,是两个指导案例的部分关键词,需要细致研究。案例指导制度具有吸纳不满的功能,其只有从事实上的拘束力上升为法律上的拘束力才能更好发挥作用,而在当下,也需要从技术、机制、程序等方面对这一制度加以完善。The two guiding cases on intentional homicide issued by the Supreme People’s Court have important guiding significance for the death penalty discretion in cases of intentional homicide.The doubts raised by some scholars about the two guiding cases are worthy of discussion.The significance of these two guiding cases in the“rectification of deviation”can not be denied and has been gradually verified by practice.With regard to the crime of intentional homicide,the notforgiveness of the relatives of the victim,the criteria for judging the cruelty of the criminal means,the assistance by the defendant’s relatives in the capture of the defendant and the nonresistance by defendant in his arrest are some of the keywords in the two guiding cases that need careful study.The case guidance system has the function of absorbing dissatisfactions.It will be able to play its role in a satisfactory way only when it is upgraded from a system with de facto binding force to a system with legal binding force.At the present,the system also needs to be further improved in terms of technique,mechanism and procedures.

关 键 词：案例指导制度 不予谅解 手段残忍 协助抓捕 法律拘束力 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]