|
| 文章编号：1672-3104(2014)05-0139-06 |
| |
|
论刑事和解的实体法构建 |
| |
张继钢 |
| |
|
（厦门大学法学院，福建厦门，361005） |
| |
| 摘 要： 基于实体与程序的一般关系、刑事和解的实体法缺位、刑法解释的张力不足以及实体方面的研究薄弱，必须转换视角，从程序转向实体。刑事和解的实体法定位路径存在责任中心与量刑中心之争，可依据能否发挥刑事和解的刑罚宽缓化功能、对理论和实践的影响大小以及是否与程序法相衔接等标准进行选择。应在刑法中确立刑事和解的法定量刑情节地位，并对刑事和解内涵、从宽处罚功能等进行完善。刑事和解全面入“刑”，对于实现刑事实体法与程序法良性互动、推进刑事和解良性运作意义重大。 |
| |
| 关键词： 刑事和解；法定量刑情节；实体法；程序法 |
| |
|
| |
Substantive law orientation of criminal reconciliation |
| |
ZHANG Jigang |
| |
（Law School, Xiamen University, Xiamen 361005, China） |
| |
| Abstract: The substantive law orientation of criminal reconciliation is justified in mainland of China. In the face of the absence of substantial law, the tension’s lack of the interpretation to criminal law and the weak research of criminal reconciliation, we should change perspective from the procedure law to substantive law. There are two location paths of criminal reconciliation to select: the responsibility center or sentencing center. We should choose one according to the function of the criminal reconciliation, influence on the theory and practice and coordination with the procedural law. This paper believes that the criminal reconciliation is one of the statutory sentencing circumstances in criminal law, and puts forward to some improvement suggestions on criminal reconciliation and lenient punishment, etc. The author holds that criminal reconciliation stipulated in the Criminal law and Criminal Procedure law have great realistic significance. |
| |
Key words: criminal reconciliation; statutory sentencing circumstances; substantive law; procedure law |
| |
|
