刑法合政策解释的学理表达与规范化路径

The Academic Expression and Standardization Path of the Criminal Law Interpretation inLinewith Policy

德国目的理性刑法体系中的刑事政策没有相对确定的内涵,不过是实质性价值判断的另一种表达方式,只具有方法论层面的宏观指导意义。与之不同,我国刑法话语体系中的刑事政策具有“准规范”特征,刑事政策成为具体司法判断的依据,对形成个案裁判规范的贡献度更为明显。但是,由于政策具有了准规范的特征,便有着突破甚至替代法律判断的内在冲动。刑法的合政策解释是在法定性框架内,通过对政策所内含价值的合理解读、输出,作用于教义学体系内部的合法律性论证。为此,可以从三个方面来规范刑法合政策解释的路径。其一,刑事政策的适用应本着“规范用尽”的原则,在法律层面的判断之后,将政策作为法律适用的补强论证理由。其二,当实在法所提供的规范依据不明晰时,优先考虑将刑事政策对标既有的教义学知识体系。其三,刑事政策的价值目标可以作用于“法益识别”,进而指导构成要件进行合目的性(限缩)解释。如此,刑法的合政策解释与教义学上的判断就能够相得益彰,共同作用于法律效果与社会效果的统一。

The criminal policy in the teleological-rational criminal law system has no relatively definite connotation,but is another expression of substantive value judgment,which only has the macroguiding significance at the methodological level.In contrast,the criminal policy in the discourse system of Chinese criminal law has the characteristic of"quasi-norm",the criminal policy has become the basis for specific judicial judgments,and its contribution to the formation of the norms of individual cases is more obvious.However,because the policy has the characteristic of quasi-norm,it has the internal impulse to break through or even replace the legal judgment.The interpretation of criminal law in line with policy is a process within the legal framework which applies the reasonable interpretation and output of the value contained in the policy to the legal demonstration within the doctrinal system.Therefore,we can regulate the judicial application of the policy from three aspects.First,the application of criminal policy should be based on the principle of“exhaustion of norms”,which means that only after the judgment at the legal level,can the policy be used as the reinforcement of reasoning for the rule application.Second,when the normative basis provided by positive law is unclear,priority should be given to the matching of criminal policy with the existing doctrinal knowledge system.Third,the value goal of criminal policy can act on“identification of legal interests”,and then guide the teleological(restrictive)interpretation of the constituent elements.In this way,the interpretation of criminal law in line with policy and the doctrinal judgment can complement each other and work together to unify the legal effect and social effect.