本文選題：政策回應(yīng)型　切入點(diǎn)：司法解釋　出處：《法學(xué)評(píng)論》2013年01期 　論文類型：期刊論文

【摘要】：通過(guò)對(duì)建國(guó)以來(lái)最高法院制定的司法解釋的研究,梳理司法解釋與國(guó)家政策關(guān)系演進(jìn)的三個(gè)階段,將司法解釋回應(yīng)政策的模式總結(jié)為:政策作為解釋法律的重要參考、政策決定司法解釋的立與廢、司法解釋成為協(xié)調(diào)政策與已有法律規(guī)定沖突的中介。司法解釋回應(yīng)政策可能導(dǎo)致一系列的不利后果,應(yīng)對(duì)司法解釋回應(yīng)政策保持必要的謹(jǐn)慎,并通過(guò)區(qū)分政策類型進(jìn)行不同方式回應(yīng)、發(fā)布回應(yīng)政策的指導(dǎo)性案例等方式對(duì)政策回應(yīng)型司法解釋予以引導(dǎo)和規(guī)范。
[Abstract]:Through the study of the judicial interpretation made by the Supreme Court since the founding of the people's Republic of China, this paper combs the three stages of the evolution of the relationship between the judicial interpretation and the national policy, and summarizes the model of the judicial interpretation response policy as the important reference for the interpretation of the law. The policy decides the establishment and the abolishment of the judicial interpretation, and the judicial interpretation becomes the intermediary to coordinate the conflict between the policy and the existing legal provisions. The policy of judicial interpretation and response may lead to a series of adverse consequences, so we should keep the necessary caution in the policy of judicial interpretation and response. It also guides and standardizes the judicial interpretation of policy response by distinguishing policy types and issuing guiding cases of policy response.
【作者單位】： 蘇州大學(xué)法學(xué)院;
【分類號(hào)】：D926

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前6條

1 王亞新;程序·制度·組織——基層法院日常的程序運(yùn)作與治理結(jié)構(gòu)轉(zhuǎn)型[J];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué);2004年03期

2 袁明圣;司法解釋“立法化”現(xiàn)象探微[J];法商研究;2003年02期

3 田芳;;法律解釋如何統(tǒng)一——關(guān)于司法解釋權(quán)的法律統(tǒng)一解釋功能的思考[J];法律科學(xué)(西北政法學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào));2007年06期

4 董v，

本文編號(hào)：1569974