摘要:法官自由裁量权的行使直接关系着公民的生命、自由和权利，法官自由裁量水平则关系着法律运行的效果。法官自由裁量权是法官在案件裁决中的自由选择权力，它的自由特性决定其本身存在缺陷。因此，只有有效地监督刑事审判法官的这一权力，才能使自由裁量权发挥最大效用，尽可能地实现“无过之无不及”，笔者建议：科学设定法官刑事自由裁量权的运行界限；进一步完善我国的刑事立法；进一步加强对刑事审判工作的监督；进一步提高我国法官的整体素质。

关键词：法官，刑事自由裁量权，存在的必要性，现状与问题，制约

Abstract:Due to legal regulations lag, polysemy, conflict and limitation, static laws and regulations and the social reality exists necessarily between contradiction. In criminal proceedings, judicial discretion is the important part of criminal jurisdiction. Both in substantive law and procedure law fully embodies the discretion of the judge, in the criminal justice activities in an important position, to exercise the judicial discretion is directly related with people's lives, liberties and rights, judicial discretion levels affect legal operation effect. Judicial discretion is the judge in the case of the free choice of ruling power, its freedom characteristics determine its own defects. Therefore, only the effective supervision of criminal trial judge this power, can cause the discretion to maximize utility, as far as possible to achieve the " no worse", study criminal judge discretion is to realize the rule by law has the significant practical significance.

Key words: Judge, Criminal Discretion, The need exists, Status and Problems, Restrict

　　　本文从自由裁量权在刑事审判中的诸多表现入手，探讨了自由裁量权存在的客观性及必要性，阐述在我国特有的国情下一些制约自由裁量权行使的情形存在，从而提出刑事自由裁量权发展的设想：要在提高法官素质上特别是法官的任用上严把关，提高审判质量。同时在裁决书的内容中要加强对证据的分析认证过程的表述及判决理由的说明来监督法官决断理由的合法性、正当性。在形式上要注重正当程序运用这种看得见正义保证实体正义，实现阳光审判，提高法院的公信力及权威。刑事自由裁量权作为刑事审判中必要的一环，需要多方面的制度设计予以保证。而制度设置的本身需兼具灵活性和可操作性，这既需要立法者的立法技巧又需要法院司法能力的提高，更需要社会公众的配合，法律仅是解决社会矛盾的一种手段，其他规范的配合更为重要。