宽容原则之上:法律解释与存疑有利于被告  

On the Rule of Lenity:Legal Interpretation and In Dubio Pro Reo

作　　者：郭烁 Guo Shuo

机构地区：[1]中国政法大学诉讼法学研究院

出　　处：《中国法学》2025年第1期285-304,共20页China Legal Science

摘　　要：传统刑法解释学预设唯一且正确的解释结论是可欲的,但该预设无论从逻辑抑或实践都站不住脚。如果真正坚持罪刑法定原则和事前法裁判原则,就很可能出现“解释僵局”,即任一解释方案均欠缺合理性比较优势,进而产生存疑有利于被告原则在法律解释领域的适用余地。于英美法,盖因宽容原则之存在,此点并无疑义。由严格解释原则发展出的宽容原则,要求法律解释的疑点利益归于被告,不仅在方法论上革新传统刑法解释学,为解释僵局提供化解方法,还在价值论上贯彻罪刑法定原则,推进罪刑法定原则的司法化。考虑到当前我国积极刑法观的立法实践,承认刑法解释亦可适用存疑有利于被告原则对防止过度犯罪化不可或缺。Traditional criminal jurisprudence presets that the only and correct conclusion is available,which is untenable in light of the logic or practice.It can be said that adhering to the nulla poena sine lege and lex retro non agit will probably lead to the situation of interpretation deadlock,that is,any interpretation scheme lacks a comparative advantage in rationality,and thus there is room for the application of in dubio pro reo in terms of legal interpretation.Among common law,this is undoubted due to the existence of the rule of lenity which was developed from the principle of strict construction.This rule requires that the beneft of doubt in legal interpretation be attributed to the defendant,which not only innovates the traditional criminal jurisprudence in methodology,but also provides a solution for the interpretation deadlock.Moreover,it implements nulla poena sine lege in terms of axiology and promotes its judicialization.Considering the positive outlook on criminal legislation in China,acknowledging the application of in dubio pro reo to the criminal law interpretation is indispensable for preventing the overcriminalization.

关 键 词：存疑有利于被告 宽容原则 解释僵局 法律适用 严格解释 

分 类 号：D914[政治法律—刑法学]