The Opposite Dilemma And Way Of Formal Interpretation And Substantive Interpretation

Clarifying and interpreting criminal law norms is an indispensable part of the criminal law application process,and the conclusions drawn based on different criminal law interpretation methods are also very different or even conflicting.Many public opinion hotspot cases are the product of the conflict between formal interpretation and substantive interpretation.For this reason,most scholars believe that presupposing a clear ranking relationship in many criminal law interpretation methods is of great significance to ensure the unity and stability of criminal law conclusions,although these scholars have different views on the order of application and effectiveness of criminal law interpretation methods.The same,but they basically agree that the formal interpretation in the criminal law interpretation method has priority in the application level,while the substantive interpretation is considered to have a core position and decisive significance within the scope of possible textual meaning.Of course,there are also different voices who believe that there is no hierarchical relationship between the interpretation methods,and the interpreter will choose the corresponding interpretation method based on his own experience and value standpoint.However,by studying some criminal cases,it is not difficult to find that,as far as the level of effectiveness is concerned,neither the formal interpretation nor the substantive interpretation has absolute decisive significance.On the one hand.although the substantive interpretation method centered on the necessity of punishment has been welcomed by the academic circles,there are inevitable limitations in the interpretation of the criminal law.First,it is derived from the"subjective" substantive interpretation of the legislators intention.The conclusion may not be consistent with the ethical value of the current society.Second,if the"objective" substantive interpretation breaks through the literal boundary that the object of interpretation may have,it is suspected of analogy.On the other hand,it is understandable that formal interpretation has priority in the order of application,but due to the inherent lagging defects of the criminal law norms,too much follow the formal logic of the provisions will inevitably lead to legal rigidity.At the same time,the formal interpretation and the substantive interpretation are not a simple binary opposition,but a relationship of mutual restraint and mutual confirmation.The essence of the two oppositions is actually the contradiction between the stability of the criminal law and the justice of the two major value goals.In order to alleviate this contradiction,judges or other interpretation subjects can only achieve the consistency of the stability and justice of the criminal law if the form and essence of the conclusion of the criminal law interpretation,specifically,the interpretation conclusion should be subject to the double test of the formal standard of "understanding and acceptance by ordinary people with ordinary judgment ability" and the substantive standard of "infringement of legal interests worthy of punishment",in order to realize the interpretation conclusion The unity of formal rationality and substantive rationality,stability and appropriateness is the so-called "simultaneous coincidence theory".