【作者】 王瑞君；

【导师】 何秉松； 刘家琛；

【作者基本信息】 山东大学 ， 法学理论， 2008， 博士

【摘要】 立法化的罪刑法定,其价值有赖于在司法运作中得以充分实现。作为我国罪刑法定之“法”的成文刑法及其所确立的规范并不能为司法办案人员解决一切问题。规范的抽象性、内容涵盖的有限性、以及作为法律载体的语言本身存在的模糊性,使得罪刑法定之“法”的局限性不可避免。于是,法律方法凸显出其重要的作用。本文试图以法律方法论的角度,站在刑事法治的立场,对罪刑法定司法化及其中的法律方法进行研究,探寻适合我国法治发展进程的罪刑法定实现的法律方法运作模式。论文由导论、正文两个部分组成,正文分四章。主要内容和观点如下:一、导论综观罪刑法定研究的现状,在我国,自1997年刑法确立罪刑法定原则,理论界和实务界出现了罪刑法定的研究盛况。但关于罪刑法定的关注多限于理念和规范层面,对于罪刑法定原则如何司法化的研究,也仅限于刑法解释层面,未曾从纵向上系统梳理罪刑法定实现的历史脉络,更无法体现在西方法学“解释学转向”以后,学者们拓展出新的法学研究领域即法律论证理论的强势下,罪刑法定该如何在坚守自己的基本价值立场,巩固自己的刑法帝王原则地位的同时所应关注的法律方法的运用,自然也不曾就罪刑法定的实现与法律方法建立起全面的联系。于是,进行研究角度的转化,由以立法为中心的研究视角向以司法为中心的研究视角转化,将着力点放置于对关键学术问题即罪刑法定司法化的突破上,特别关注法律方法在其中的运用,是本文思考罪刑法定实现的一个基本的定位。如果就罪刑法定实现的字面含义而言,可大体包含理念层面的实现、立法层面的实现、司法层面的实现等,其中司法层面的实现非常关键。由于法律方法,在多数场景被理解为法律适用中的方法,法律方法司法定向的特征,以它作为罪刑法定实现的研究角度,也就限定了本文所言的罪刑法定的实现系指司法层面的实现。论文选题的意旨就在于如何通过法律方法的运用实现罪刑法定。论文大体按法律方法学说不断更新和罪刑法定演变的大体脉络来设定研究进路。考虑到绝对罪刑法定时代的刑法机械适用的理想设计尽管以不可实现的幻想而告终,但这种设计与理论构想对建立近代严格刑事法制具有不可磨灭的历史意义,故将这部分称作刑法的机械适用与绝对罪刑法定的命运,单列一章。紧随其后为通过解释实现罪刑法定、通过论证实现罪刑法定,均各自成章。具体内容力求实践法律方法之于刑事裁判之运用,将法律方法的理论和实践品格与刑法部门法丰富的素材和实践遇到的大量的疑难案件和问题相结合,即可取纯哲学思考之理论思辨之魅力,又不乏一些鲜活个案分析的实践吸引力,更能为法官裁判刑事案件提供一种更具实用价值的思维方式和思维范例。尽管不同法系、不同国家罪刑法定的体现形式各不相同,然而法律方法运用的共性是不容否认的,特别是随着英美在刑事法领域制定法越来越多,关于制定法适用的法律方法更凸显出共同值得思考和关注的问题。因此,论文重在阐述共性,同时对特殊之处予以个别说明。沿着法律方法学说不断更新和罪刑法定演变的大体脉络所归纳出的刑法的机械适用、刑法解释与法律论证,并未构成法律方法的全部。可以说,法律方法由近代单一的机械适用的设计,发展到今天已经得到极大的拓展,形成一系列法律方法结合而成的法律方法体系。法律推理、法律解释和法律论证这三种基本的法律方法跟法律发现、漏洞补充、价值衡量等其他法律方法在司法实践中的运用往往交织在一起,是综合运用的过程。我国是法治后发型国家,立足于我国法治后发型的现实,针对立法、司法的特征,就我国罪刑法定实现作进一步思考,是当下应当关注的重要话题.于是,对法律方法之间关系进行总结、梳理,并在次基础上确立我国罪刑法定实现中法律方法运用的基本立场,即为论文专设第四章的意旨所在。二、刑法的机械适用与绝对罪刑法定的命运绝对罪刑法定的设计产生于17、18世纪特定的时代。当时欧洲中世纪司法黑暗导致的对法官的不信任并促成的对法律确定性的崇拜和近代国家实证主义和理性建构主义法律观,构成欧洲大陆罪刑法定产生的特有的社会背景和思想文化背景。基于欧洲大陆特有的背景而生成的罪刑法定原则,以三权分立作为制度支撑,立足于法律形式主义的立场来规定和设计该原则的基本内涵和刑法的具体内容。把罪刑法定中的“法”理解为成文的、有权制定法律的机关所制定的法;把犯罪归结为对法律规范的违反;在法的基本属性问题上强调法律表现形式的确定性;在法的价值取向上把维护个人自由放在首要的位置上;将司法作机械适用模式的设计,三段论的演绎推理是法官裁判案件的基本逻辑思维模式,法官只是立法者制作的法律机器的操作者。在欧洲大陆,机械适用模式的实践在其运作中,又与概念法学的学理支撑形成互动关系。而几乎在同一个时代,尽管英美形成了具有不同于法德等大陆法系国家的司法传统,但如果将法的机械适用模式理解为严格法制时代法律运作的特征的话,那么,英美法系同样曾存在过机械法理学,这一点表现为近代政治理论中法官被理解为法律的执行者而不是法律的制定者的观念,此观念对英美的刑事司法影响同样非常明显,即严格的先例观念及通过制定法对普通法犯罪的严格限制。刑法的机械适用与绝对罪刑法定的设计作为一种乌托邦式的设想,尽管以实践中的行不通告终,但特定历史背景下的设想和立法和司法环节的努力却造就了一个特定的严格法制时代,这对于欧美走向法治功不可没。此模式遭遇过多的批判,然而不仅其树立的严格法制立场对于法治后发型的我国具有重要的理念启发意义,并且,机械适用设计下的三段论演绎推理的法官裁判案件的思维模式,对今天刑事案件的裁判仍具有重要的价值。三、通过解释实现罪刑法定19世纪末期,刑事古典学派终结了其历史使命,继之而崛起的是刑事实证学派。刑事实证学派对以严格规则主义为特征的绝对罪刑法定主义进行了抨击,主张扩大法官的刑法解释权,降低刑法典的意义。罪刑法定自此由绝对走向相对。与此同时,法律方法呈现出由机械适用的观念设计到法官解释法律取得自由裁量权的转型。尽管不同国家学者给出的法律解释包括刑法解释的原因各具风格,但归纳起来大体上不外乎:语词本身在表意时的内在局限性;现实的发展变化与法的相对稳定性之间的矛盾;法律规定的概括性与现实案件的个性之间矛盾等方面。就之所以要进行刑法解释,在作者看来,其必要性尚有如下补充:其一,罪刑法定推崇的成文法的局限性使刑法解释成为必然;其二,罪刑法定原则的价值蕴涵不排斥刑法解释;其三,罪刑法定原则下法官解释刑法与罪刑法定原则在实现个案正义与一般正义上的互补和统一。一般法律方法意义上的解释方法于刑法领域的运用,表现出不同于其他部门法的特点:刑法解释较为严格;文义解释优先性更为突出;不利于被告的类推解释被绝对禁止;当然解释的把握要合事理、合逻辑:扩张解释需要慎重,并需区别于类推解释:对词语的解释离不开具体的语境。就影响法官刑法解释的材料而言,主要表现为习惯、学说、判例、道德准则等:在我国,非正式的司法解释同样构成影响刑法解释的重要材料。作为影响法官解释刑法材料的习惯、学说等,其作用是中性的。英美国家特别是美国,根据判例解释制定法构成其刑法解释的鲜明特征。美国根据判例解释刑法制定法所实践的增强判决的确定性与变动性相结合、深化判决的说理性、确保刑法解释不偏离刑事法治轨道的品格对于我国的刑法解释理论与实践具有重要的借鉴意义。四、通过论证实现罪刑法定当依据不同刑法解释方法对案件裁判出现不同结论,又无法确定排序先后时,法律论证理论遂成为近几十年逐步走向前沿并取得强势的新的法律方法,该方法的运用意在加强判决的可接受性和合理性。其中与司法裁决相关联的话题,可归纳为:从独自到对话——法律方法模式的转变:案件繁杂程度与法律论证:价值判断与法律论证;裁判理由的公开;审判程序模式:法律论证的规则、法律论证的方法等等。尽管罪刑由事前法律作出明文规定是罪刑法定的基本内涵,但法律不可能解决所有罪与刑的全部问题。作为刑法基本范畴的罪与刑,均具备一定的开放性,由此为法律论证提供了发挥作用的空间,尤其在犯罪构成存在“开放性要件”或定罪、量刑涉及价值衡量的场合。自20世纪70年代以来,刑法私法化倾向越来越明显,刑事领域同样可以妥协,为法律论证提供了更为广泛的空间。法律论证之于罪刑法定,能够实现理性程序与实体公正的兼顾,司法民主与司法公正得到更好的实现。然而法律论证表现出来的缺乏普适性、理性参与人的假设、价值判断难题、“合意性、可接受性”作为判决的归旨等等特征,也同时显现出其固有的局限性。法律论证于刑事领域的运用同样暴露出其局限与不足。加之,法律论证于刑事裁判制约于罪刑法定原则,有效的观念、规则和程序仍需坚守。因此,法律论证方法之于刑法领域,其运用场域和作用的释放,需要正确处理与罪刑法定原则的关系,在罪刑法定主义的框架之内发掘论证领地,是作者的基本立场。五、法律方法的综合运用与我国实现罪刑法定的进一步思考自近代法律近乎机械适用的设计,到承认法官解释法律,再到法律论证方法的法律方法学说和实践的发展,反映了法律适用理论与实践不断提升的过程。横向上来看,具体法律方法之间既相对照更存密切关联,当今的个案裁判很难说仅采用其中一种法律方法能够完成,而是法律方法综合运用的过程。综合运用不排除有所偏重,即法律方法的运用与一国或地区一定时期的主导价值观紧密相连,并且制约于案件事实与法律规范之间的复杂关系,罪刑法定的实现也是如此。刑法解释、法律论证、演绎推理等法律方法的运用,需要思考它们在法律方法体系中的地位和相互关系问题,特别是通过解释、论证如何实现刑事个案事实与罪刑规范相关联的问题,此即法律裁判思维模式问题。自二十世纪以来,国内外学者提出各自不同的法律裁判思维模式。“推论模式”、“等置模式”、“解释循环”等的提出,均不再是对传统三段论演绎推理模式的原版复述。加之,许多法学家提出关于法律不确定的命题加大了演绎推理遭到质疑的程度。在作者看来,在制定法国家,甚至在判例法国家,演绎逻辑思维的基本骨架始终在裁判思维过程中得以保留,其逻辑有效性仍然存在,近百年来法律判决形成的模式未能动摇演绎逻辑推理作为法律思维核心方式的地位。具体到刑事法领域罪刑法定原则下,法官发现法律、法官解释刑法、对刑法进行论证等的重要使命就在于:通过解释、论证实现罪刑规范的确定性,以为刑事个案裁判解决法律推理的大前提。对罪刑法定的实现进行研究,重点仍然在于当下中国罪刑法定的司法运作问题。因此,立足于我国法治后发型的现实,依案件事实与罪刑规范的不同关系,综合运用不同法律方法并依具体情况有所侧重,对我国罪刑法定的实现具有重要的实践意义。基于法律方法之间关系的考察和我国法治后发型的现实:首先,以既存刑法规范作为依据的制约原理不能偏离。其次,刑事司法实践中应视案件事实与罪刑规范之间的不同关系生成不同的运用方法。其三,当解释法律形成多解,而司法活动的特征就在于于规定时间作出发生效力的判决,于是,以宪法为最高位阶的法律规范系统作为该论证的基本前提,以使法律裁决能符合社会共识的正义,并在正当程序保障下,藉由理性论证以解决各种法律争议,对于刑事法治的确立是不可或缺的。更多还原

【Abstract】 The key point of the realization of no punishment without Law is in judicial course. The criminal law and its regulations could not provide all keys for judges. The abstract of regulations ,the limits of contents of law and the vague of legal languages make the penal law be limited ,so legal method is very important. The thesis should research model of legal method fitted for our constitutionality process by studying the judicial application of the principle and the application of legal method .The research should insist on the criminal constitution and be from the angle of legal method.This thesis is composed of introduction and main body. The main body comprises four chapters. The main contents and viewpoints are as follows:1. IntroductionA grand occasion of researching the principle of no crime without Law happens since the principle was established in 1997 .The research is mainly about the idea or regulation .Though some research pay attention to the realization in judicature, it is limited to the level of interpretation .Researchers have neither make the history of the realization of the principle clear , nor make out how to apply methods when the argumentation has been the leading legal method ,nor set up complete connection between the realization and legal methods during which the principle and its value should be insisted on. To change research angle from legislation to judicature and to pay close attention to the realization of the principle and the application of legal methods is the thesis’ aim.The realization of the principle includes some levels such as idea ,legislation and judicature, among which the level of judicature is the key point. Because of the judicial character of Legal method , to research the principle from the angle of legal method has make it clear that this thesis mainly study the judicial realization of the principle .To research how to realize the principle by using legal methods is the thesis’ intention. The research is designed according to the history of theory of legal method and the development of no punishment without Law. The design of mechanical application of the resolute principle failed ,but the design and its idea are important to the realization of modern legal system ,so the first chapter is named mechanical application of penal law and the fate of the principle. Follows are realizing no punishment without law by interpretation or by argumentation .To make concrete contents practical ,this thesis connect theory and practical characters of legal method with the rich materials of criminal law , cases and questions. Thus not only the attraction of philosophy thinking and living case can be get ,but also the thinking model of judging criminal case will be provided to judges.The style of no crime without law varys in different families of law or different countries, but all apply legal methods .As statutes are more and more in England and America, the application of legal methods about statutes gets more important .The thesis should mainly narrate their common ,and tell characters specially.Mechanical application , interpretation pf law and legal argumentation ,which is summarized according the history of legal methods and no crime without law ,are not represent all legal methods. A system of legal methods has been formed since modern times . Methods listed above have close connections with other methods such as finding law ,compensating hole in law and measuring value. Considering the situation of our slow constitutionality ,to make further think about the realization of no punishment without law is important, so to comb the relationships of legal statutes and then to make clear our standpoint on how to use legal methods is the main point of the last chapter.2. Mechanical Application and the Fate of Resolute Principle of no Crime without LawResolute no crime without law was designed in 17 and 18 century . National positivism ,rational construction doctrine and resolute faith in precise law, which are formed by legal idea of no faith in judges because of dark judicature in modern Europe, are the special social ,ideological and cultural condition .The principle is based on system of separation of powers and formed its contents taking stand of legal formalism. In those days ,the law of no crime with out law was thought to be statutes ,the crime was taken as violating statutes ,The precision of penal law was be stressed ,the value of law was taken as protecting private liberality ,the mechanical application and deductive reasoning was taken as the basic logical thinking model ,and judges were only user of the legal machine. Later the practice of mechanical application and conceptualist jurisprudence got sustained with each other. In the meanwhile .though Anglo-American law system formed its own tradition of justice ,it also had mechanical legal philosophy if we take the model of mechanical application as character of the strict legal system age Judges were taken as the executer ,not enactor ,and this idea also affect its criminal justice ,which took the form of strict precedents and limiting common-law crimes by statutes.Mechanical application and resolute no crime without law failed at last ,but it made an age of strict legal system. This is important for Europe and America to be constitutional states .Though the style got many critics , its idea of strict legal system will inspire us and today deductive reasoning is still enlightening judging criminal cases.3. Realizing the Principle of no Crime without Law through Interpretation.In the end of 19 century ,criminal classical school gave its way to criminal positional school which criticized the resolute principle and proposed to extend judges’ power of interpretation and to cut down statues status. The principle developed from resolution to relativity, at the same time ,legal method turned from mechanical design to right of discretion.The reasons given by different counties are different ,but the common reasons are as follows: legal language is limited ,contradiction exist between development and stability ,between summary character and special cases. Besides these ,there are other reasons :firstly the limit of statutes make interpreting penal law necessary ,secondly the value of the principle does not reject interpretation, thirdly to interpret criminal law can help arrive compensation and unity between special justice and general justice .Interpretation of penal law is different from what in other branch laws in that interpretation of penal law is strict. Plain interpretation is obvious. Analogical interpretation is banned. Natural interpretation is not only truthful but also logical. Widen interpretation which is different from analogical interpretation should be cautious. To interpret legal languages could not depart from language condition . Tradition ,theory ,cases ,ethics, etc are materials affecting interpretation .In our country .informaljudicial interpretation is also one of the materials. Function of these materials are neutral.In counties of Anglo-American law ,to interpret statutes in light of cases is their obvious characteristic. To interpret penal statues in light of cases in America, which carries out special regulations and rules and has natures such as combination of stability and alternation, the rationality of conviction and the identification with the rule of law ,will inspire the theory and practice of our penal law interpretation.4. Realizing No Crime without Law through ArgumentationWhen different legal methods bring different conclusion and to make orders of them is difficult, legal argument becomes the leading method since it rose about 40 years ago. legal argument emphases the acceptance and nationality of judicature. Topics connected with judicature include :from monologue to dialogue -model of legal method transformation ,complex cases with argumentation Judging value with argumentation ,opening reason of judicature, judicial procedure model , rules of legal argument argumentation, methods of legal argument, etc.That crime and punishment are provided for by law in advance is required by no crime without law, but statutes could not do all things. The open nature of regulations provides wide space for argumentation. legal argument has its limit and shortness, besides, legal argument is restricted by no crime without law, so effective idea ,rules, procedure should be abided by .When legal argument apply to penal law ,its applying field and function should code with its relationship with the principle .To find argumentation space under the principle is writer’s basic standpoint.5. Using Legal Methods Comprehensively and Pondering over Realization of no Crime without Law in Our Country Further .Inspecting the history of legal method vertically, it proceed from mechanical application to interpretation of law, then to legal argument. Examining legal methods horizontally, they not only compare with each other but coincide with each other deeply. To decide cases , one method is not enough but using different methods comprehensively is necessary. Applying legal methods is directed by main value of the states or districts and is restricted by relationships between legal statutes and cases .So is no crime without law.To apply legal method such as interpretation of law .argumentation and deductive reasoning and so on ,we should consider their status in the system of legal methods and relationship among them, especially the relationship between legal methods and regulations enacted in advance . What is the relationship between judgment and regulations ?Many scholars suggest different models of judicial adjudication thinking .The theories of’Subsumtionsmodell model" , "Gleichsetzungs modeH""interpretation circle",are different from the traditional deductive reasoning. Besides this ,the definition of the regulations which scholars point out enhance the doubt about the deductive reasoning. But in written-law countries and also in case law countries, the skeleton of the deductive reasoning exists in the course of judicial adjudication. As for criminal law, no crime without the law do not reject judge’s interpretation ,so the mission of the interpretation is to get ready for the big premise of the legal reasoning through interpretation and argumentation which can make the criminal regulations more definite.The research of realization of no crime without law in our country is the key point of research of realization of the principle, so basing on situation of our slow constitutionality ,to apply legal methods comprehensively according to the relationships between legal statutes and cases , which is directed by the value of the principle of no punishment with out law, has important practical meaning. On this point ,firstly we could not drift from the existing and effective regulations. Secondly different legal methods should be used according to different relationships between the cases and regulations. Thirdly because different interpretation will come out and cases should be decide in arranged time ,we should take the system of regulations ,ofwhich constitution is the highest ,as the argumentation premise .We should makejudgment accord with justice and settle disputes by rational argumentation whichdepends on due procedure .All of these are indispensable to realization ofconstitutionality.更多还原