论文部分内容阅读
2015年3月,我国《立法法》迎来首次修改,司法解释主体法定化是此次修改的一大亮点。《立法法》第一百零四条第三款规定:“最高人民法院、最高人民检察院以外的审判机关和检察机关,不得作出具体应用法律的解释”。具有宪法性法律性质的《立法法》确认最高人民法院与最高人民检察院是享有司法解释权的法定主体,除此以外的审判机关和检察机关均不得作出司法解释。本文将围绕《立法法》第一百零四条第三款规定,首先明确法定司法解释主体的含义以及遵循法定司法解释主体的意义,其次对实际中非法定司法解释主体制定司法解释的违法问题作类型化分析,最后对司法解释主体法定化问题提出一点完善的建议。
In March 2015, China’s “Legislation Law” ushered in the first revision, the legal interpretation of the main body of judicial interpretation is a major highlight of this revision. Article 104, Paragraph 3 of the Legislation Law stipulates: “Trial organs and procuratorates other than the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate shall make an explanation of the specific application law.” The Legislative Law, which has the nature of a constitutional law, confirms that the Supreme People’s Court and the Supreme People’s Procuratorate are the legal subjects enjoying the power of judicial interpretation, and that judicial organs and procuratorial organs other than these are not allowed to make judicial interpretations. This article will focus on the provisions of article 104, paragraph 3, of the “Legislation Law”. First of all, it clarifies the meaning of the main body of statutory judicial interpretation and the meaning of the main body of statutory judicial interpretation. Secondly, For the type of analysis, the final judicial interpretation of the main statutory issues put forward a little more perfect suggestions.