困境与重构:反思国际刑法对合法性原则的灵活处理

Reflecting on the Flexible Arrangements of Legality in International Criminal Law: Dilemmas and Reconstruction

合法性原则在国际刑法中的适用缺乏明确的标准,大量国际刑事审判的实践对其采取灵活处理的方法。国际刑法早期的渊源较为匮乏,国际刑法追求的多元化目的之间存在内在冲突,《罗马规约》又建设性地保留一定的模糊空间,是合法性原则被灵活处理的主要原因。对合法性原则的灵活处理,主要诉诸一些国家刑法的近似内容、国际人道法中的禁止性规定、自然法原则这三个常见路径,实质地扩大了据以定罪的渊源,使三者均存在难以解释的逻辑困境。应当以规约标准为出发点,从澄清国际刑法的渊源、明确解释方法并出台具体的量刑指南三个维度,重构合法性原则的严格标准体系。

There is no clear standard of legality in international criminal law. Plenty of practices took a flexible attitude towards legality as a result. Poor sources of rules in the earliest time, the inner conflict between the diverse targets pursued by international criminal law, the constructed ambiguity left on purpose by the Rome Statute may account for those flexible arrangements. There are basically three approaches to the flexible arrangements: the similar contents in the criminal laws of some jurisdictions, the red-line rules in international humanitarian law and the natural law rules. These approaches, however,have substantially expanded the sources of establishing crimes. These dilemmas in logic and reality could hardly be made up for. This paper starts with the baseline in the Rome Statute, in an attempt to reconstruct a strict standard on legality with clear sources of crimes, correct methods of explanation and specific guidelines for sentencing.