刑事指导性案例同司法解释的关系——补充说的证成

The Relationship between Criminal Guiding-cases and Judicial Interpretations——The Justification of the Supplement Theory

关于刑事指导性案例同刑事司法解释的关系,学界与实务界大致形成三种观点,即取代说、并立说、补充说。取代说缺乏对指导性案例与司法解释互补性的考量,从当前与长远来看,均是不足取的;并立说将指导性案例等同于司法解释,否定了两者在内容与效力上的区别,忽视了两者相辅相成、互相补充、相互转化的紧密联系;补充说从原则上来讲是成立的,但仍需要从刑事指导性案例和刑事司法解释各自优缺点的互补性等细节上予以证成。从实然上来看,刑事指导性案例同刑事司法解释并行不悖,从应然上来讲,两者相辅相成。

In theoretical and practical circles there exist three viewpoints , which can be named as replacement theory, col-lateral theory and supplement theory, about The relationship between criminal guiding-eases and judicial interpretations. Be-cause of lacking considerations on complementary between guiding-cases and judicial interpretations, so the replacement theorycan not be adopted; the collateral theory sees guiding-eases same as judicial interpretations, which denies the difference betweenthem and ignores the complementary relationship between them; basically the supplement theory is right, but it still need to bejustified by complementary details between criminal guiding-cases and criminal judicial interpretations. In practical status thecriminal guiding-cases and the criminal judicial interpretations are co-existence, in normative status them are complementary.