题　名  罪刑法定与我国刑法的价值选择  
作　者  秦雨虹  
作者单位  吉林大学,法学院,长春市 130012  
专　业  刑法学  
指导教师  张旭  
学位级别  303  
馆藏索取号  3990105  
中文文摘  罪刑法定原则在1997年被确定为我国刑法的一项基本原则。它的确立,标志着我国适用了17年之久的类推制度的废除,标志着我国社会法制化进程的加速,标志着我国人权保障的意识的提高。能否正确理解罪刑法定原则的含义、明确其思想理论保证、把握其精神实质、认识其价值所在等等,都直接关系到罪刑法定原则在司法实践中的运作及依法治国的实现。为此,笔者就罪刑法定原则从理论基础、价值内涵、立法体现及实现保证等方面进行探讨,旨在进一步提高对罪刑法定原则的认识,以推进司法工作中对这一原则更好地适用。
本文的核心部分共分为四章:
第一章论述了罪刑法定原则的早期渊源、历史发展及理论基础,指出了罪刑法定的思想渊源于1215年英国的大宪章,认为启蒙自由主义推崇的个人自由权利的思想、三权分立理论强调的行政权、立法权和司法权分立及心理强制说所持的从心理上抑制人们的犯意来进行社会防卫的主张都为罪刑法定原则的发展提供了理论保障。
随着资产阶级革命的成功,罪刑法原则不仅为大陆法系国家所确立,而且英美法系各国在司法实践中也加以适用。在大陆法系国家里,它以成文法的形式存在于刑法乃至宪法中；在英美法系国家里通过以下三方面来体现:1、在有限的成文法律中规定罪刑法定原则；2、对刑事程序和实体立法进行宪法限制,以保证罪刑法定原则的实现；3、对司法解释进行限制。它的适用派生出六大原则,即禁止事后法、禁止类推、排除习惯法、否定绝对不确定的法定刑、明确性原则和实体的适当原则。
第二章是关于罪刑法定原则的价值内涵的分析。
纵观罪刑法定原则发展的历史,出现了对罪刑法定原则的形式主义理解和实质性理解的两大流派。
形式的理解罪刑法定原则以个人本位主义为基础,认为罪刑法定原则的核心是法律条文内容的确定性和明确性,极端崇拜法律的形式化,片面追求罪刑法定原则的权利保障功能,成为公民自由的大宪章。
实质性的理解罪刑法定原则以社会本位主义为基础,要求法律实现其社会责任,认为只有能满足社会需要的法才是真正的法,力求在成文法之外去寻求法的渊源,主张以法官能动地司法弥补立法的不足,强调刑法的社会保护功,是社会利益的捍卫者。
形式主义的罪刑法定原则和实质性的罪刑法定原则,或者偏废其社会保护功能,或者偏废其权利保障功能,都不足取。应把握罪刑法定原则的精神实质,确保它的两种功能的充分发挥,使其效益最大化。
第三章论述了我国的政治体制改革、经济体制改革导致了社会结构的变化及社会观念的转变,人们的经济意识开始觉醒,在意识形态领域表现为追求个人的权利、注重个人价值的实现。同时,法律为适应社会的需要也逐渐发生了观念上的转换,在刑法这种价值的转换,重要标志就是在第3条明确规定了罪刑法定原则,并在总则、分则条文中都体现了罪刑法定原则的精神。
罪刑法定原则在我国刑法中体现主要有：
1、废除了类推罪制度；2、刑法不溯及既往的否定之否定；3、使犯罪、刑罚以及犯罪与刑罚关系明确化；4、科学地规定了法定刑；5、规范了对法律用语的解释；等等。
罪刑法定原则的立法化对我国实现社会主义民主、健全社会主义法制、维护市场经济秩序、保障公民的基本自由权利、依法治国及与世界刑法发展趋势接轨等都有着积极的意义。
第四章论述了罪刑法定在立法、司法和体制上实现的保证。
任何一部法律都难免会出现立法漏洞和立法滞后,为弥补这些方法上的缺陷,应通过立法机关的立法解释、制定附属刑法规范及修改和补充刑法来实现,才能不违背立法原意,才能体现罪刑法定原则的精神实质。
为保证制定出来的法律贯彻到现实生活中,必须以司法为保障。在司法上,要注重提高司法工作人员的思想素质以及法律水平,加强司法解释工作,完善司法工作监督。
罪刑法定原则要求司法的独立,这就需要改革我国现有的体制,使司法机关脱离行政机关在财务、人事等方面的制约,直接受控于中央,才能真正实现司法独立。  
英文文摘  The principle of defining penalty by law was accepted as a basic principle of Criminal Law in 1997. The acceptance marks the abolishment of 17-year-long analogization system, the precedence of our society legalization, the increase of the defense of human rights.
The article has four chapters:
The first chapter is about the origin, historical development and theoretical basis of the principle. The author points out that the origin is dated to England Great Charter of 1215, as well as the right of personal freedom and the theory of dividing government into three separates which were praised by individualist in period of enlightenment emphasize the separation of administrative power, legislative power and judicial power and from the psychological point suggest making social defense. And it provides the protection for the development of the principles.
With the success of Bourgeois Revolutionary, the nations not only in continental legal system but also in B.A.F. legal system began to use the principle in judicial practice. The nations in continental legal system put the principle in criminal law and constitution by written form. The nations in B.A.F. legal system express it from 3 aspects. 1. Stipulate the principle in the limited written law. 2. Limit the criminal procedure and law making by constitution so as to ensure the realization. 3. Limit the judicial explanation. Six principles can be derived from its application, which is prohibition of after doing, analogization, habitual, denying indefinite penalty by law, and the principle of concrete.
The second chapter is on the analysis of the internal value of the principle.
Tracing the history of its development, there appeared to be two different factions that understand the principle from form and essence respectively.
Understanding the principle from form is based on individualism, those who belong to this faction think that the heart of principle is the clearness and definiteness of regulations. They extremely admire the written form of laws, and pursue the insurance of the principle''s right one-sided, furthermore take it as the charter of freedom.
Understanding the principle from essence is based on socialism. Those who believe so demand to realize the social responsibility by laws. They believe the laws that can meet the needs of society are real laws, and try to seek the origin of law outside the written form. They suggest remedying the weakness by judge''s dynamic role, and emphasize on the protection function of society. They are the guards of social benefits.
Formally and essentially understanding the principle are both unacceptable because they neglect the protection function of society and right respectively. We should grasp the spirit and ensure the fully developing of its two functions, moreover to realize the maximum benefit.
The third chapter discusses the change of social composition and social concept with the reform of political system and economic system. Now people''s economic consciousness begins to awake, and what expresses in field of ideology is the realization of pursuing personal right and individual value. At the same time, laws are changed conceptually in order to meet the need of society. The changes of criminal law are clearly showed in Volume 3 in which the principle is stipulated and its spirit can be both expressed in general rules and detailed rules.
Principle of defining penalty by laws can be best expressed in criminal law as follows:
1. Abolish analyzation system.
2. Not trace back to former-used method: negation of negation.
3. Clarify crime, penalty and their relationship.
4. Regulate the penalty by laws scientifically.
5. Standardize the explanation of legal expression.
The legislation of principle has an active role to realization of social democracy, amplification of social legal system, defend of economic order of market, safeguard of nations by laws and development of world criminal law.
The fourth chapter discusses the insurance of realization in legislation and judicature.
Any law can inevitably have flaw and obstruction to legislation. We can remedy the defects by legislative explanation, establishing supplementary norm and revising criminal law of legislation organ in the premise of no violating the legislation. There fore the spirit of principle can be best expressed.
In order to implement the stipulated law into real life, judicature must safeguard the laws. In judicature, more attention should be paid to increasing the judicial personnel'' political awareness and legal levels strengthen the work of judicial explanation and perfect the supervision of judicature.
The principle demands the independence of judicature; that is to say, it needs to reform our present. Systems separates the judicial organ from the restriction in accountancy and personnel. Therefore we can realize the real. Judicial independence by controlled by the central authorities.

关键词  罪刑法定,刑法,价值选择,自由词  
分类标识  D924.1  
论文注解日期  19990315  
总页数  67P