摘要
当今形式解释与实质解释之争日趋激烈,不同刑法解释立场对严重的教师虐童行为应否入刑以及入刑应如何定罪的问题形成不同的观点:形式解释论认为在罪刑法定原则的基石下,现行刑法中无对其规制的合适罪名,只能以无罪处理;实质解释论则认为可以以故意伤害罪对其定罪量刑。形式解释与实质解释在罪刑法定视域下其实是高度统一的,只是面对不同案件应选择不同的解释限度。当前我国已进入法治轨道的初始期,入罪时应坚持形式解释优先的原则,不宜轻易突破法条原义;出罪时应坚持实质解释的优先性,对虽有明文规定但不具有严重法益侵害性的行为只能以无罪处理。这方为严密刑事法网、贯彻罪刑法定原则的要求,也是人权保障的应有之义。
Whether the cases which kindergarten teachers abuse children should be regulated into penalty or not and how to convict these cases,different interpretations of criminal law formed different views： formal interpretation thinks that the current criminal law has no suitable charges that can regulate these cases under the principle of legally prescribing penalty,but substantial interpretation regards that the crime of intentional injury can do. Actually,the formal interpretation and the substantial interpretation is highly unified,different interpretations will be suitable for different cases. China has just come into the legal track,we should give high priority to formal interpretation when incriminating as China is now in the initial period of the legal track,not breakthrough the articles easily; and give high priority to substantial interpretation when decriminalizing. This principle,which can tidy up the criminal law,is in line with the principle of legally prescribing penalty and the meaning of protection of human rights.
出处
《绵阳师范学院学报》
2015年第7期37-41,共5页
Journal of Mianyang Teachers＇ College
关键词
形式解释
实质解释
罪刑法定
解释立场
虐童犯罪
formal interpretation
substantial interpretation
principle of legally prescribing penalty
interpretation of criminal law
crime of child abuse
