刑法解释方法位阶性的质疑

文义解释有诸多局限,需要其他解释方法来印证和检验,因此其并不具有优位性。客观目的解释的功能具有多面性,其仅在目的性缩限时具有绝对优先性,因此不能一概认为其有决定性;主观目的解释仅在提供不处罚的立法资料时具有特殊价值。在刑法解释的商谈、试错过程中,方法的采用有"各取所需"的特点,采用何种解释方法取决于对处罚必要性的判断;解释是一种结果,通常是在结论确定之后再选择解释方法,为法官定罪与否提供"事后注脚";由于司法裁判必须考虑国民的认同感,且要接受后果考察,刑法适用就必须兼顾大量解释方法自身难以涵括的各种复杂因素。因此,如何立足于法条用语的通常含义,将犯罪论体系、规范保护目的、国民的规范认同、处罚必要性等内容一并考虑,并且坚持实践理性,选择对个案最为合适的解释方法,将实质解释的结论限定在特定时代能够接受的范围内,从而平衡好惩罚犯罪和保障人权的关系,是比刑法解释方法的位阶性更为重要的问题。

Questioning the Hierarchical Nature of Criminal Law Interpretation Methods

In the eyes of most Chinese scholars, criminal law interpretation methods are hierarchical to some extent. This specious view, however, is not only of very limited practical significance, but also contradictory to judicial logic. The fact that textual interpretation is at the starting point of interpretation does not mean that it is a decisive interpretation method. Textual interpretation has a multitude of limitations, requiring verification and validation by systematic interpretation and teleological interpretation. Systematic interpretation can hardly be separated from teleological interpretation. The functions of objective teleological interpretation are multifaceted: it should have priority only when teleological contraction is applied, and it should not be considered as always being decisive. Subjective interpretation constitutes a part of teleological interpretation, and it brings in a special value only in terms of providing legislative materials of impunity. In the process of trial and error as well as that of consultation of criminal law interpretation, various interpretation methods should be applied "as it requires", that is, the decision on which method should be applied depends on the judgment on the necessity of penalty, and the choice of interpretation method is an outcome of the judgment previously made, providing an ex post facto footnote to the judges'' decision on criminality. It is more meaningful to focus on the complexity of judicial process and the formation process of judicial practical logic than to explore the hierarchy of criminal law interpretation methods, to meticulously construct various application rules of interpretation methods than to rank those different methods, and to study factors that really affect the application criminal law.