人治,法治,还是法官之治/谭千花
法治、人治、还是法官之治？
——论“定罪”的自由裁量权及其在司法实践中的问题
谭千花 杨建国
[摘要]
“罪由法定”和定罪的自由裁量权从本质上看，是对立统一的辨证关系。犯罪的复杂性和刑法规定的有限性，是法官具有定罪自由裁量权的客观基础；“徒法不能自行”和法官不能拒绝裁判，是法官具有定罪自由裁量权的根本原因。因此当被告人的违法行为处于罪与非罪的模糊区域，或审判人员对相同的法律和司法解释存在不同的解读时，法官对被告人定罪与否有自由裁量的权力，但应当遵循无罪推定的基本原则。探讨法官定罪的自由裁量权，对社会主义法治建设具有重要的理论和实践意义。
Abstract
In essence, the nature that “Crime is statutory” and the conviction discretion are in an opposite dialectical relationship. The complexity of crimes, as well as the limitations on regulations stipulated in the Criminal Law, becomes the objective base for the judge to exercise conviction discretion; and the fact that “Law cannot work on its own” and that the judge cannot escape verdict, is the fundamental reason for the judge having conviction discretion power. Therefore, when transgression of the defendant was in a vague position between crime and non-crime, or when the understanding varies among different judges towards the same law and judicial interpretations, the judge shall have the discretion power to decide whether the defendant in question is guilty, which shall conform to the principle that give the accused the benefit of the doubt. To probe into the conviction discretion possessed by the judge has its significance to the socialist nomocracy.
总共7页 1
[2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] 下一页