Substance Rules And Proof Standards Of The Hermeneutics Of Criminal Law

For a long time,the study on the hermeneutics of criminal law in China takes the "only-substance" criminal law view as the guiding ideology.The substantiality of the research object and the substantiality of the research output constitute the two premises of the "only-substance" criminal law view.However,due to the existence of procedural matters and other non-substantive parts in the criminal law and the output of "by-products" such as criminal proof standards in the research process,the premise of "only-substance" criminal law view is not completely appropriate.The task of the discipline of the study on the hermeneutics of criminal law determines that only substantive norms are not enough to complete the task of criminal law interpretation,a set of standards of proof matching with substantive norms is equally important for judicial practice.At present,there are many phenomena in the study on the hermeneutics of criminal law in China,such as the abstraction of legislative criminal proof standard,the fragmentation of judicial criminal proof standard,the abstraction and non systematization of academic criminal proof standard,which all reflect the overall situation of "imbalance between supply and demand" in the study of criminal proof standard.The causes of the current research situation of "despise proof" lie in the current situation of the separation of substance and procedure at the disciplinary level,the mixed understanding under the research path of "identification" at the methodological level and the single standard of the evaluation system at the conceptual level.Under the current research situation of "despise proof",the binary interactive structure between criminal substantive rules and criminal proof standard can not play an active role,which leads to three theoretical problems: the distortion of standard expression,the dislocation of evaluation standard and the alienation of proof standard.In the field of civil law,civil law scholars pay full attention to the civil burden of proof,specifically as follows: The theoretical position of the civil burden of proof is discussed deeply;the civil substantive rules is the basis of the civil burden of proof;the reasonable distribution of the civil burden of proof can promote the optimization of the civil substantive rules.Based on the idsubstance of logical structure,thesimilarity of action mechanism and the equivalence of discussion significance,we can compare the civil burden of proof with the criminal proof standards,and draw the following enlightenment on improving the binary interactive structure of criminal substantive rules and criminal proof standards: the subject of substantive law should also study the problem of proof;substantiality rules should determine the interpretation of the rules of proof;the rules of proof should be used as the criteria to evaluate whether substantiality rules are appropriate or not;the determination of the rules of proof should serve the purpose of substantiality rules.It is an important demand of criminal procedure to realize the standardization of criminal proof behavior.However,due to the restriction of proof standard on proof behavior,the realization process of this demand often falls into a dilemma.There are three pairs of positive relationship between criminal substance rules and criminal proof standards: The distance between the degree of standardization of constitutive requirements and the standards of criminal substance and criminal proof,the degree of abstraction of constitutive requirements and the requirement of criminal substantiality standard for criminal proof and the number of uncertain factors in constitutive requirements and the difficulty of determining criminal proof standards.In this way,we can examine the system of the hermeneutics of criminal law: It is difficult to prove subjective main facts,vague main facts,undecided main facts and negative main facts,which is the main field of the alienation of proof standards.The fuzziness of the meaning,the change of the times and the diversity of the objects of adjustment determine that there are many possibilities for the interpretation of criminal substance rules,Therefore,within the reasonable limits,in the process of the selection of the normative interpretation scheme of criminal substance rules,the objective path and the clear interpretation conclusion should be selected,and the necessary transformation should be made to the undecided main case facts and the necessary restriction should be made to the design of the negative main case facts.In this way,we can realize the demand of the standardization of proof behavior by the optimization of the criminal proof standards.On the other hand,based on the practical value of "barometer","compass" and "adhesive",criminal proof standard plays an important role in the generation,adjustment and elimination of criminal substantive rules within a reasonable limit.Therefore,in an ideal state,a benign interaction mode of mutual promotion and optimization can be constructed between criminal substance rules and criminal proof standards.The independent character of the standard of criminal proof has the function ofconstructing the concept system,which is the prerequisite for further research and the theoretical premise for realizing the system optimization.As for the way to confirm the independent character of the standard of criminal proof,"incorporation" is much better than "exclusion" in many aspects,which should be advocated.Therefore,the independent character of criminal proof standard should be understood as the relative independence of criminal proof standard in the system of the hermeneutics of criminal law.The establishment of the independent theoretical status of the criminal proof standard,the promotion of the independent research methods of the criminal proof standard and the construction of the independent evaluation standard of the criminal proof standard are the proper paths of confirming the independent character of criminal proof standard.In order to establish the independent theoretical status of criminal proof standard,the hermeneutics of criminal law should make efforts in three dimensions: definition,theoretical framework and value concept: determining the appropriate definition on the basis of comprehensively considering the purpose,characteristics and attributes of the definition of criminal proof standard;setting up a strict and detailed theoretical system for the study of criminal proof standard starting from description logic and creation logic;following a set of independent values applicable to criminal proof standards beyond the value concept of criminal substance rules.Research methods play a fundamental role in scientific research.All specific research fields have corresponding research methods.The fit between research methods and research fields is an important factor to determine whether research in this field can develop healthily.In the process of the study on the hermeneutics of criminal law in China,the most common research method used is the normative analysis method in the study of law.Although the normative analysis method and the criminal substance normative research have a considerable agreement,considering the factual and practical characteristics of the criminal proof standard,the normative analysis method is not suitable for the research of the criminal proof standard.In view of the fact that the issue of criminal standard of proof is different from many aspects of criminal substantive rules in the hermeneutics of criminal law,interdisciplinary research methods are bound to become the focus of the study of criminal standard of proof,logic theory,empirical research method and procedural law theory should be paid attention to in the process of establishing independent research methods.A qualified evaluation standard should have three characteristics: the consistency with the theoretical threshold of the evaluation object,the value concept in line withthe specific theoretical threshold,and the basic function of selection.There are three inadaptability in the evaluation standard of criminal proof standard,which are improper selection of theory threshold,incomplete evaluation object and deviation of value concept.Starting from the basic characteristics,value concepts and research methods of criminal proof standards,the evaluation standards with the contents of "in line with the logic rules,experience summary process rules and in line with the proof rules" should be advocated.It is of great significance for the study on the hermeneutics of criminal law in China to build a benign interaction model between criminal substance rules and criminal proof standards.Firstly,the benign interaction mode means that the study on the hermeneutics of criminal law should not be limited to the category of criminal substance rules,but should be examined from the perspective of the interaction between criminal substance rules and criminal proof standards.The perspective of proof provided by benign interaction mode provides a more convincing purpose of criminal law interpretation,and has the function of purpose endowing in the sense of methodology.Secondly,the criminal proof standard has the function of eliminating inappropriate substance rules,and the benign interaction mode has the function of theoretical cleaning.Behind it lies the improvement and mechanism of criminal proof standard for criminal substance rules.Thirdly,the promotion of the benign interaction mode has brought the expansion of the evaluation standard of the hermeneutics of criminal law,therefore,the benign interaction mode has the improvement function of the existing interpretation path of criminal law.Manifested as improving the criminal substantive rules according to the evaluation system of criminal proof standard within reasonable limit and revising the standard of criminal proof according to the formation mechanism of the standard of criminal proof when a criminal proof standard can not be consistent with the relevant criminal substance rules.Fourthly,the concept of benign interaction mode comes from the needs of practice,and its program also serves the criminal justice practice as the final destination,that is,the benign interaction mode should have the function of guilding practice.Therefore,the benign interaction mode is not only limited to the optimization of criminal substantiality standard,but also includes the promotion function of criminal substantiality standard to criminal substantiality standard.It should not only be a macro conception in the sense of theoretical construction,but also be enough to be closely combined with specific case handling.Practice should not be the object of ridicule.On the contrary,practice is animportant perspective to carry out the study of hermeneutics of criminal law.From the perspective of judicial practice,this paper tries to introduce the criminal proof standard that judicial practice pays close attention to into the perspective of criminal interpretation.It is expected that the study on the hermeneutics of criminal law in China will also pay more attention to this field,and take this opportunity to realize the benign interaction between the theory of criminal law and the practice of criminal justice as soon as possible.