现代化治理视域下的刑事政策导向——能动与有限的分野
|
摘要
国家治理现代化已成为我国当前改革施政的总纲领。法律治理与政策治理是国家治理现代化的基本技术进路。在犯罪治理体系中,刑事政策兼具法律规则与公共政策的双重属性是现代化治理的理性工具。面对现代化治理的具体诉求,刑事政策对于刑事立法、刑事司法与公共政策运行三大方面均表现出良性的助推功用。从宏观叙事到具体用力,我国当前刑事政策在治理情境中不能实施从头至尾的积极考量,而应当严格区分立法与司法两相操作之间的路径差异,在区别对待中努力构造能动之治与有限之治双向分野的刑事政策治理图式。
National governance modernization has become the general program in our reform policy.The Law Governance and Policy Governance are the basic techniques of national governance modernization.In the criminal governance system,the criminal policy,containing a dual attribute of the rule of law and public policy,is the rational tool of modern governance.In the face of the specific demands of modern governance,the criminal policy is playing a critical role in boosting the criminal legislation,criminal justice and public policy.From the macro narrative to the specific enforcement,in the current governance situation,China's criminal policy cannot be actively implemented from first to last,but we should strictly distinguish the differences between the legislation and judicial operation.In a word,we should construct the preeminent Criminal Policy Governance pattern of both initiative governance and limited governance.
National governance modernization has become the general program in our reform policy.The Law Governance and Policy Governance are the basic techniques of national governance modernization.In the criminal governance system,the criminal policy,containing a dual attribute of the rule of law and public policy,is the rational tool of modern governance.In the face of the specific demands of modern governance,the criminal policy is playing a critical role in boosting the criminal legislation,criminal justice and public policy.From the macro narrative to the specific enforcement,in the current governance situation,China's criminal policy cannot be actively implemented from first to last,but we should strictly distinguish the differences between the legislation and judicial operation.In a word,we should construct the preeminent Criminal Policy Governance pattern of both initiative governance and limited governance.
引文
[1]卢建平.我国的刑事政策研究[J].人民检察,2009(11):14-17.
[2]申建林,徐芳.治理理论在中国的变异与回归[J].学术界,2016(1):126.
[3]江必新.国家治理现代化基本问题研究[J].中南大学学报(社会科学版),2014(3):139.
[4]张文显.联动司法:诉讼社会境况下的司法模式[J].法律适用,2011(1):2-6.
[5]拉斯韦尔,卡普兰.权力与社会:一项政治研究的框架[M].王菲易,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2012:87.
[6]安德森.公共决策[M].唐亮,译.北京:华夏出版社,1990:4.
[7]史际春,赵忠龙.竞争政策:经验与文本的交织进化[J].法学研究,2010(5):104.
[8]黄京平.以法治原则实施制度化的刑事政策[N].法制日报,2015-9-9(10).
[9]李斯特.德国刑法教科书[M].徐久生,译.北京:法律出版社,2000:2.
[10]储槐植.美国刑事政策趋向[J].北京大学学报,1985(3):124-128.
[11]卢建平.刑事政策与刑法关系的应然追求[J].法学论坛,2007(3):61.
[12]储槐植.刑事政策的概念、结构和功能[J].法学研究,1993(3):58.
[13]吴忠民.社会公正论[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2004:305.
[14]满涛.着力发展科学的刑法立法学研究[N].中国社会科学报,2016-6-8(5).
[15]孙万怀.宽严相济刑事政策应回归为司法政策[J].法学研究,2014(4):175-189.
[2]申建林,徐芳.治理理论在中国的变异与回归[J].学术界,2016(1):126.
[3]江必新.国家治理现代化基本问题研究[J].中南大学学报(社会科学版),2014(3):139.
[4]张文显.联动司法:诉讼社会境况下的司法模式[J].法律适用,2011(1):2-6.
[5]拉斯韦尔,卡普兰.权力与社会:一项政治研究的框架[M].王菲易,译.上海:上海人民出版社,2012:87.
[6]安德森.公共决策[M].唐亮,译.北京:华夏出版社,1990:4.
[7]史际春,赵忠龙.竞争政策:经验与文本的交织进化[J].法学研究,2010(5):104.
[8]黄京平.以法治原则实施制度化的刑事政策[N].法制日报,2015-9-9(10).
[9]李斯特.德国刑法教科书[M].徐久生,译.北京:法律出版社,2000:2.
[10]储槐植.美国刑事政策趋向[J].北京大学学报,1985(3):124-128.
[11]卢建平.刑事政策与刑法关系的应然追求[J].法学论坛,2007(3):61.
[12]储槐植.刑事政策的概念、结构和功能[J].法学研究,1993(3):58.
[13]吴忠民.社会公正论[M].济南:山东人民出版社,2004:305.
[14]满涛.着力发展科学的刑法立法学研究[N].中国社会科学报,2016-6-8(5).
[15]孙万怀.宽严相济刑事政策应回归为司法政策[J].法学研究,2014(4):175-189.