刑法追訴時效溯及力原則的確證與展開

在追溯時效溯及力的問題上，“從新原則”與“從新兼從舊”原則都因理論基礎缺陷與法律根據失當而缺乏正當合理性。追訴時效溯及力應當採用“從舊兼從輕”原則，其正當根據首先來自於罪刑法定原則的支撐。其次，《刑法》第12條溯及力條款的規範保護目的為追訴時效溯及力採用“從舊兼從輕”原則提供了目的論解釋根據。最後，最高人民法院的司法解釋通過補正解釋的方式也確證了追訴時效溯及力應當採用“從舊兼從輕”的原則。司法實踐中對於涉及新舊刑法交替的刑事案件，應當先進行刑法溯及力判斷再進行追訴時效判斷，對於刑法溯及力判斷與追訴時效的判斷可以交叉適用新法和舊法。應當嚴格按照刑法條文的字面涵義對1979年《刑法》第77條的“採取強制措施後”進行文理解釋，把司法機關只作出採取強制措施決定但沒有實際採取強制措施的情形排除在不受追訴期限限制的範圍之外。

The principle of application of new law and the principle of application of old and new laws lack propriety due to the absence of theoretical basis and the inappropriateness of legal foundation. The principle of application of the old law with the exception of a light punishment has its propriety firstly from the support of nulla poena sine lege doctrine. Furthermore, the normative protection purpose of the retroactivity clause under Article 12 of the Criminal Law provides teleological interpretation basis for the principle of application of the old law with the exception of a light punishment. Finally, through supplemental interpretation, the judicial interpretation by the Supreme People's Court certified that the principle of application of the old law with the exception of a light punishment shall be adopted on the retroactivity of prosecution limitation. In practical cases concerning alternation between new and old criminal laws, retroactivity judgment shall be done before prosecution limitation judgment; new and old laws can be applied crosswise to adjudicate retroactivity and prosecution limitation problems. The term ''after the compulsory measures are taken'' in Article 77 of the 1979 Criminal Law should be interpreted strictly according to its textual meaning, thereby excluding the condition where the judicial organ only made decision of taking compulsory measures but did not take them in fact from the conditions not limited by prosecution limitation.