The Interpretable Position Of Criminal Law

Criminal Law needs to be explained, which is a consensus in the academic field. In terms of how to interpret and to what extent can it be interpreted, they are still plagued in the study of Criminal Law. In China, the argument between subjective and objective interpretation has gone through a long period. And the objectivism has the upper hand, which has become a common sense of scholars in the study of Criminal Law. The two interpretations have not been dominated, yet another dispute of formal interpretation theory and substantial interpretation theory sets off. In this case, the formal interpretation theory and the substantial interpretation theory have been started from their respective positions.This paper is divided into four parts, trying to explain the interpretable position of Criminal Law from perspectives of formal interpretation theory and substantial interpretation theory. The first part talks about the necessity of interpreting Criminal Law. The arbitrary conviction and the abuse of penalty in the medieval criminal law aroused hatred in the classical criminal school, for which they were against the interpretation of Criminal Law. After the rising of the empirical school of Criminal Law, the position of anti-interpretation was shaken. At present, scholars around the world are no longer for the absolute unexplainability of Criminal Law, but for the necessity of interpreting Criminal Law. The second part talks about the occurrence and development, confrontation and conflict of the dispute between formal interpretation theory and substantial interpretation theory, based on a full understanding of these two perspectives of Chinese scholars. In the third part, substantial interpretation theory will be questioned for its defects in law itself, its ignorance of the rule of law, its ignorance of the need of formal rationality in China, its ignorance of the expansion of incrimination and its ignorance of the amendment of Criminal Law. All these are combined with China’s current social situation and historical factors. In the last part, the misunderstanding between formal interpretation theory and substantial interpretation theory will be discussed. Based on the comparison of the two perspectives, formal interpretation theory is advocated.