摘要
对法的确定性问题素有肯定与怀疑两说。本文从刑法实证研究的角度,基于几千个最高法院示范性案例的分析发现:用法庭认定的规范性事实只能预测大约48.8%的量刑结果;理论归纳后的法律理由与法律结果之间的关系又呈现出某种确定性;不同法律事实对刑罚轻重有程度不同的解释力。在此基础上,本文导出了公正的可检验性命题,并阐述了公正的检验标准以及审判质量管理的实践方案。
Two theories coexist concerning the certainty of law. One insists on the certainty of law while the other doubts it. Based on the regression analysis of thousands of model cases from the Supreme Court, this paper empirically finds out that normative facts determined by the court can only predict 48.8 percent of the sentencing results. But the connection between legal causes and results concluded by legal theories presents some certainty, and different legal facts define the lenience and strictness of law to different degrees. Grounded on such study, the paper concludes that equity can be proved and meanwhile sets forth the proof criteria of equity and the practice project for trial supervision.
出处
《中国法学》
CSSCI
北大核心
2008年第2期51-61,共11页
China Legal Science
基金
国家社科基金资助项目"刑事司法公正性实证研究"的阶段性成果之一
