On Some Problems Of Criminal Law Interpretation

The internal studies on criminal law interpretation have made much more progress, but generally speaking, they are still on the initial stage and decentralized. So the further studies on it are essential. This thesis does further studies mainly on the concept and the speciality, the existing reason and the rule of criminal law interpretation.Firstly, the concept and the speciality of criminal law interpretationOn the bases of analyzing the researches on criminal law interpretation , the author brings forward his own opinion. The author concludes that: (1) The subjects of criminal law interpretation should include legislative orgams, judicial organizations, other organizations, social organizations, people's organizations, legal experts, legal scholars, judicial personel, and other citizens. And moreover, the subject should be a part of the concept of criminal law interpretation; (2) The object of criminal law interpretation should be criminal stipulations; (3) The direct purpose of criminal law interpretation is making up the flaws of criminal law, and the indirect one is making criminal law be able to apply to specific cases; (4) The concept of criminal law interpretation is usually used on two levels which are ( I )a kind of static conclusion,( II )and a kind of moving activity of interpretation. In respect to the speciality of criminal law interpretation, the author claims that it consists of subordinate speciality, directional speciality, strict speciality, relatively subjective speciality and relatively objective speciality.Secondly, the existing reason of criminal law interpretationThe existing reason of criminal law interpretation comprises real foundation and reasonable foundation. Inevitable flaws and legislative mistakes lie in any one criminal code, which is the real foundation of criminal law interpretation. And the inevitable flaws of criminal law include uncertain characteristic, partial characteristic, conflicting characteristic, and unreasonable characteristic. However, criminal law having flaws and mistakes can't necessarily result in criminal law interpretation. The reasonable foundation of criminal law interpretation lies in its philosophical foundation that is philosophical theory of interpretation; and secondly in its comparative asset embodied in legal practices.Thirdly, rule of criminal law interpretationOn the problem about rule of criminal law interpretation, there are three kinds of theory among scholars, and they are the doctrine of "Subjective Interpretation", "Objective Interpretation", and "Synthetic Interpretation". The essential discrepency between the three theories arises from their different foundations on philosophy, legal science, and political science. And the author claims that the rule of criminal law interpretation should be a rule of "Application In Order". Furthermore, the rule is built on the literal meaning of criminal law and "Intervening Norm". According to this rule all kinds of methords of interpretation are adopted in a certain order.