刑法类推解释如何得以进行——刑法演绎推理中的类推解释

类推是重要的法学思维方法,罪刑法定允许类推解释,但是禁止作为法律漏洞填补方法的"类推适用"。类推解释以不法类型为指导,在三段论演绎推理的逻辑外壳下得以进行。类推解释的关键在于就问题案例与概念核心中的特例进行比较,衡量它们在语义、目的上的相同点的重要程度,作出等值评价或反对解释。类推解释有助于解决实践中争议很大的存疑案件。     

国家地位信号释放与俄罗斯军事干预叙利亚

俄罗斯自2015年9月开始军事干预叙利亚危机。对于俄罗斯为何进行军事干预以及采取空袭的干预方式,国内外学术界尚存争议。俄罗斯军事干预叙利亚的主要目标是通过干预行动向不同的目标观众——包括叙利亚巴沙尔政权、叙反对派、"伊斯兰国"等恐怖组织和以美国为首的西方国家等——发出一系列的地位信号,以巩固和重塑俄罗斯的大国地位。针对不同的目标观众,俄罗斯使用了"炫耀性消费""分享性给予""倾向性解释"和"寻求性斗争"四种信号传导策略。就效果来看,俄罗斯的军事干预大致实现了其预期目标。通过地位信号这一视角分析俄罗斯军事干预叙利亚的目标与策略,不仅提供了一种理解国家行为的分析框架,也能为推动叙利亚问题的解决提供一定启发。     

‘Gross inefficiency and criminal negligence’: the Services Reconnaissance Department in Timor in 1943–45 and the Darwin war crimes trials in 1946

The post-World War II Australian military war crimes trials of Japanese from 1945–51 have been criticised for using a rule of evidence considerably relaxed from the ordinary requirements of a criminal trial, one that did not require witnesses to give evidence in person. Circumstantial evidence suggests that, in relation to a trial held in Darwin in March 1946 for war crimes committed in Timor, the secretive Special Operations Australia, otherwise known as the Services Reconnaissance Department (SRD), took advantage of the rule. This article argues that the SRD did not allow their members to give evidence in person in an attempt to control and limit the dissemination of information about their operational and security failures in Timor from 1943–45. The SRD operation was adjudged by its own official historian as displaying ‘gross inefficiency and criminal negligence’. While the SRD’s failures were known to select personnel at the time, access restrictions to archival records in the post-war period, including the war crimes trials, meant that the extent of its failures and how it appeared to manage knowledge of them has not been widely known.     

What drives rental votes? How coalitions signals facilitate strategic coalition voting

Rental voting is a coalition voting strategy, by which supporters of a senior coalition partner cast their vote for the prospective junior coalition partner to secure its representation in parliament and, hence, the formation of this coalition. We make transparent that previous research has only studied rental-voting in contexts, in which coalition signals were consistent with the rental-vote logic. Employing a qualitative identification strategy, we find evidence for rental voting only in the context with consistent coalition signals. Moreover, respondents exposed to consistent coalition signals behave similarly to voters who most likely did not receive the inconsistent coalition signals they had been exposed to.     

女性主义叙事意识形态阐释中的类比转义

转义(trope)和类比(analogy)是女性主义叙事意识形态阐释的核心逻辑，是对男权主义传统的“性类比思维”进行逆向类比推理，从底层思维逻辑质疑二元对立模式，受到20世纪60年代至80年代思想学术界研究范式转型的深刻影响。以“个人的即政治的”理念变迁、伍尔夫叙事的价值之争、对《笑忘书》的意识形态阐释为例，可见女性主义理论批评从理念、理论批评到阐释案例不同层面以类比转义方式解构“二元对立”。借助类比转义，女性主义叙事的意识形态阐释得以深入揭示类比叙事、二元对立的“确定性”与“非确定性”等深层社会意识和文化符码，但也可能因推理方式本身的缺陷出现主观偏误。     

试论刑法学中类推解释与扩大解释的区别

类推、类推解释和类推适用,三者之间是什么样的关系,是否具有相同的涵义,在大陆法系和英美法系具有不同的理解。正确地理解三者的关系,对于认识类推解释与扩大解释的区别具有很大的帮助。类推解释与扩大解释的区分,是刑法学解释中一个重要的、复杂的问题。探究类推解释与扩大解释的区别标准,一直是刑法学家努力的目标。     

Explaining the Origins of the Iran Hostage Crisis: A Cognitive Perspective

Psychological approaches have long been utilized to try to understand the mindsets of terrorists, but much of this literature has drawn on Freudian-inspired psychoanalytic approaches derived from the field of what is sometimes known as abnormal psychology. Building upon recent work which has largely dismissed the value of this kind of approach, this article suggests that we ought to draw more actively than hitherto upon newer, cognitive-based approaches to the study of terrorism. Stressing the importance of analogical reasoning in normal human reasoning, this article seeks to explain the actions of the Iranian students who stormed the U.S. embassy in Tehran in November 1979. Cognitive images of “another 1953,” it is argued, played an especially decisive role in the hostage takers' decision-making processes. While analogical reasoning represents only one cognitive approach to decision-making, future research in the field of terrorist studies should utilize more up-to-date “mainstream” approaches to understanding the psychology of terrorist decision-making.     

A difficulty with oaths: On trust, trustworthiness, and signalling

In the wake of the Enron and Worldcom financial scandals that rocked Wall Street in 2002, the US government’s financial regulatory body, the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) took the unprecedented step in June 2002 of requiring that the chief executives and chief financial officers of America’s 947 biggest companies to swear on oath that their company results and financial reports were to the best of their knowledge accurate. The one-off order was quickly followed by the passing of the Sarbanes-Oxely act, which will require many more CEOs and CFOs to certify their company reports and financial statements at regular intervals. In this paper we apply a simple signalling model to examine whether or not this type of institutional signal of trustworthiness is always efficient. We find that in the presence of signalling costs, the separating equilibrium can be socially inefficient as well as causing a general loss of trust. JEL classificationC72. D81. D82. K22     

刑法适用中类比推理的系统检视——对“禁止类推”命题的反思

谈及类推,刑法学界普遍认可＂禁止类推＂这一原则。实际上＂禁止类推＂这一命题过于笼统和模糊,以至于几乎每个国家都有刑法权威学者对该命题持保留态度。刑法适用过程中的＂类推＂具有两种面相——作为漏洞填补方法的类推适用和作为法律适用基本方法的类推思维,前者应被刑法禁止,而后者却是刑法适用中无法禁止的推理方法。这两种类推之间的区别,实质上就是一种＂度＂的把握,而将＂度＂界定为刑法规范目的指导下的犯罪类型更具有操作性。另外,既然刑法中两面性的类比推理足以囊括刑法适用中的全部类推,那么摒弃＂类推解释＂这一充满争议的概念更为合理。     

刑法适用中扩张解释的方法及其界限——兼论扩张解释与类推适用之区分

刑法适用过程系具体化法律和抽象化案件事实的过程,法官应对存有疑义之条款进行解释。扩张解释系刑法解释之结果,在对刑法条款进行扩张解释过程中,应明确所运用的各种解释方法及其所遵循的步骤。德、日的典型判例及我国实践都存在正确和误用扩张解释现象,应正确运用刑法解释方法,明确扩张解释的界限,准确区分扩张解释与类推适用。法官在个案中无法运用扩张解释时,立法机关应当通过及时修订法律的方式填补法律漏洞。