报应主义刑罚观念是刑法针对已然犯罪行为的应答,这使得它难以产生出面向未来的效果,因此,针对报应主义的批评主要是认为它不具有社会治理的效果,是一种消极的甚至是一种纯粹破坏性的刑罚观念。为了回应这一质疑,必须回归到报应主义的内涵,即一种蕴含着确认公民自由的报应主义刑罚理念。如果为了回应对报应主义刑罚消极性的批评,仅仅考虑报应主义在建构国家与法的合法根据上的积极价值,则将潜藏着维护法之权威优越于确认自由的危险。因此,有必要进入报应主义的另一维度,即从实践具体正义的角度——恢复到一种平等状态,以发掘其积极价值。在这一维度,报应主义刑罚观的价值在于使被害人能够作为一方积极主体参与刑罚基准权的博弈,从而使法对正义的追求不再体现为纯粹的结果性要求,而是一种实践性机制,在这一点上,古老的复仇法则为这种参与提供了值得参考的刑罚价目表。 The concept of retribution penalty is the response of the criminal law to the already existing criminal behavior, which makes it difficult to produce the future effect. Therefore, the criticism of retributivism is mainly that it does not have the effect of social governance is a negative or even a A purely destructive concept of punishment. In order to respond to this question, we must return to the connotation of retributiveism, a concept of retribution that contains a confirmation of civil liberties. To respond to the criticism of the repulsion of the reprisal penalty and to consider only the positive value of retributivism in building the lawful bases of statehood and law, there is the danger that the authority of the law of safeguarding prevails over the risk of affirming freedom. Therefore, it is necessary to enter another dimension of retributivism, that is, from the point of view of practicing concrete justice, to return to an equal status so as to explore its positive value. In this dimension, the value of the concept of retributivism is to enable the victim to participate in the game of punitive benchmark as one of the active subjects so that the pursuit of justice no longer manifests itself as a purely consequential requirement, but as a practical mechanism At this point, the ancient law of vengeance provided a reference list of penalties for such participation.