摘要
与1996年以及2012年中国《刑事诉讼法》两次修改不同,2018年修法以全国人民代表大会常务委员会通过"修正案"的形式完成。根据刑事诉讼法基本法律之定位以及《宪法》《立法法》上"闭会期间""部分补充和修改"等关键词语的法解释分析可知,以修正案形式修改基本法律的方式有待商榷——对于"牵一发而动全身"的刑事程序法律尤其如此。长此以往,刑事诉讼法的基本面向以及法的安定性、权威性皆会受到负面影响,同时限缩公民权利的制度性门槛也将降低。为了兼顾刑事诉讼法修改的严肃性与灵活性,一方面需通过《宪法》《立法法》相关条文规定的时间、数量、框架三要素,对全国人大常委会基本法律修改权进行严格限制;另一方面,在严格遵循法律保留等原则下,对刑事诉讼法司法解释进行准立法式改造是一条可行的改良路径。
Unlike the two previous revisions of the Chinese Criminal Procedure Law in 1996 and 2012,the 2018 revision of the Law was completed in the form of an"amendment"passed by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress.The basic law positioning of the Criminal Procedure Law in the Chinese system of law and the legal hermeneutic analysis of such key terms as"inter-sessional period"and"partial supplementation and amendment"in the Constitution and the Legislation Law indicate that the legal resources for revising the basic law in the form of amendment are insufficient.This is especially true for the Criminal Procedural Law,in which"a slight move in one part may affect the system as a whole".If this practice continues in the future,the basic aspects as well as the stability and authority of the law will be negatively affected,and the institutional threshold for limiting civil rights will also be lowered.In order to give equal consideration to both the seriousness and flexibility of the revise of the Criminal Procedure Law,China should on the one hand strictly restrict the basic law amendment power of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress through the three elements of time,quantity and framework stipulated in the relevant provisions of the Constitution and the Legislation Law,and on the other hand,carry out quasi-legislative reform of the judicial interpretation of the Criminal Procedure Law under the precondition of strictly complying with the principle of legal reservation.
出处
《环球法律评论》
CSSCI
北大核心
2021年第2期119-133,共15页
Global Law Review
作者简介
郭烁,中国政法大学诉讼法学研究院教授。
