不少人存在一种误解,认为刑罚个别化与刑罚统一是一对不可兼得的二难悖论命题,以致在两个都想要或者在两个都不大想要之间纠结不已。以笔者之见,刑罚个别化与刑罚统一并非二难悖论,相反,二者均是刑事法治的当然追求,是刑罚透明化、可预测性的当然要求。可以认为,刑罚统一是对任意量刑的否定,而刑罚个别化是对刑罚统一的再否定,这样的否定之再否定的过程是司法由粗放式运行到标准化运行再到精细化运行的发展过程。美国的判决前调查报告制度为我们提供了通过正当程序实现刑罚个别化的良好经验。我们应当在总结法治发达国家的法学理论和立法规律的基础上,根据我国的现实情况构建我国的判决前调查报告制度。 Many people have a misunderstanding that the reunification of punishment and reunification of punishment is a dilemma that can not have both propositions, so that both want or are not between the two want to tangled endless. In my opinion, the individualization of penalties and the unification of penalties are not a dilemma. On the contrary, both are the pursuit of criminal law and order of course, and they are of course the requirements of transparency and predictability. It can be considered that the reunification of penalty is the negation of arbitrary sentencing, and the individualization of penalty is the re-denial of penalty reunification. The negative re-denial of this kind of process is the process of judicial development from extensive mode of operation to standardization of operation to elaborate operation. The pre-judgment investigation report system in the United States provides us with good experience of individualizing penalties through due process. On the basis of summing up the jurisprudence theory and law of law in the developed countries of the rule of law, we should construct our country’s system of pre-judgment investigation report according to the reality of our country.