结果导向的刑法实质解释论  

Result-oriented substantive interpretation theory of Criminal Law

作　　者：季书贤 Ji Shuxian(China University of Political Science and Law,Beijing 100089,China)

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学刑事司法学院,北京100089

出　　处：《辽宁公安司法管理干部学院学报》2021年第4期67-74,共8页Journal of Liaoning Administrators College of Police and Justice

摘　　要：关于刑法解释立场的问题,近年来划分成了形式解释阵营和实质解释阵营,双方的争论点主要在于价值判断顺序、构成要件和刑法机能等方面。但是,双方并未突破传统法教义学解释范畴,从方法论层面给司法实践提供一条切实可行的解释道路。由于现代社会的转型和价值的多元化,以司法能动主义和实质法治为基础的实质解释论显然能够更好地满足实践需要。正义导向和举轻以明重的实质解释路径无法保证实质解释的结果符合罪刑法定原则,结果导向路径的实质解释通过对“结果”中道德、民意和政策的考量,将价值判断融入规范的解读之中,从而保证演绎推理的结论兼具“正义性”和“规范性”。In recent years,the issue of the interpretation of the criminal law has been divided into the formal interpretation camp and the substantive interpretation camp.The disputes between the two sides mainly lie in the order of value judgment,the constituent elements and the function of criminal law.However,the two parties did not break through the traditional legal doctrine interpretation category,but gave judicial practice a practical interpretation path from the methodological level.Due to the transformation of modern society and the diversification of values,the substantive interpretation theory based on the judicial activism and the substantive rule of law obviously can better meet the needs of practice.The justice-oriented and the substantive interpretation path of sentencing the severer according to the lighter cannot guarantee that the results of the substantive interpretation comply with the principle of legality.The substantive interpretation of the result-oriented path integrates value judgments into the interpretation of norms by considering the morality,public opinion and policy in the“results”,so as to ensure that the conclusion of deductive reasoning has both“justice”and“normative”.

关 键 词：实质解释 形式解释 正义取向 举轻以明重 结果导向 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]