正当防卫“僵尸条款”的“苏醒”:“于海明案”的法理分析

The Revive of the “Zombie Clause” of “Justifiable Defense”:Jurisprudential Analysis of “Yu Haiming Case”

“于海明案”五天后被认定“正当防卫”,并宣布撤销案件。案件虽了但本案引发的争论并未平息,联想近年来的“于欢案”等,着实需要对正当防卫在法理上予以澄清和论证。“于海明案”的再次出现及其争论绝非偶然,与长期以来“正当防卫”在认定上的相对保守有关,这不仅导致司法理念与立法理念的背离,而且人文环境和司法环境也缠绕其中。当然任何事情都不是孤立的,此次“于海明案”的及时处理,不能不说与先前“于欢案”的激烈争论和先期准备有关。但更应反思的是,长期以来司法观念上的滞后,包括认识上的偏差及“惯性司法”的思维定势,同时也应检讨刑法第20条立法上的不足,注意从立法完善、司法理念、法治环境和适用标准等多个层面加以改进。

“Yu Haiming case” was recognized as “ justifiable defense” five days after the crime was committed, and was withdrew by the prosecutors. Even though the case was closed, the controversy caused by it did not ended up. It needs to be clarified and discussed from the perspective of jurisprudence, and “Yu Huan case”which happened in recent years shall be bundled for consideration. The recurrence and the controversy of the “Yu Haiming case” is not come out from nowhere, it relates to the long term existed relatively conservative definition of “justifiable defense”. It not only leads to the deviation of judicial and legislative concepts, but also entwines the humanistic and judicial environments. The handling of the “Yu Haiming case” in a timely manner must be related to the fierce debate and advance preparation of the “Yu Huan case” in last year. It has been reflected that the long-standing lag in judicial concepts, including conception deviation and the thinking pattern of “inertial justice” shall be reexamined.