مطالعه تطبيقي بنيادهاي تفسير قوانين جزايي در فقه اماميه و حقوق غرب

A Comparative Study of Criminal Interpretive Foundations between Shiite and the Western Law

اين مقاله با تحليل ديدگاه عالمان امامي و غربي در باب هرمنيوتيك و تفسير جزايي، و همچنين طبق يافته‌‌هاي زبان‌شناسي براساس دو روش عقلي و نقلي در پي بررسي پايه‌‌هاي فهم و تفسير قوانين جزايي است. به طور كلي، در همه نظام‌‌هاي حقوقي، فهم قانون كيفري تنها با قواعد تفسيري ميسر مي‌‌شود و اين در مكتب اماميه، نيز صادق است با اين تفاوت كه چون اماميان قوانين جزايي را براساس نظريه توحيدي وضع مي كنند، پس دادرسان نيز بايد بر مبناي همين نظريه به معنايابي قانون بپردازند و با قواعد تفسيري، معاني مورد نظر شارع را كشف مي‌‌كنند. ولي در مكاتب حقوق غربي، قانونگذار طبق اراده جامعه عرفي به تقنين مي‌‌پردازد و بنابراين، مفسر قانون نيز بايد در پي كشف همان مقاصد قانونگذار عرفي باشد. اماميان با نظريه تفسيري خاص خود طبيعتاً در اتخاذ منابع تفسير جزايي و وضع قواعد فهم قانون نيز از غربيان جدا مي‌‌افتند.

However, criminal interpretation is regarded as the main factor which makes the courts issue different judgments, the legislator have not defined the nature of interpretation in the law yet. Probably, the lawmaker considers interpretation as a personal matter that each person has his own interpretive method. But the right of appeal against the lower criminal courts to the appeal courts, and making all the courts bound to follow the same judicial precedence by the Supreme Court, show that the criminal interpretation has the general principles. In this article, the author has tried to make clear the criteria and factors of the interpretation. The Muslim legislature should make Islamic penal code according to the belief in the Divine will (monotheism) therefore, similarly the Muslim judge should understand the criminal text in accordance with the desire of God Almighty. Since without understanding the purpose of the lawmaker, the judge may not interpret the text of law, then in his interpretive process, he must rely upon these three elements: the criminal interpretive theory, sources and rules. With the science of interpretation (hermeneutics), the judge can infer the ways of knowledge of legislature`s purposes from the interpretive sources these ways are the general rules of the linguistics and the special interpretive rules.