2015年2月19日，河北省石家庄市长安区北高营村村民贾敬龙持事先准备好的射钉枪将在春节团拜会现场的村长兼书记何建华杀害。2015年11月24日，河北省石家庄市中级人民法院判处贾敬龙死刑立即执行，剥夺政治权利终身。2016年11月15日，石家庄中院依照最高人民法院院长签发的死刑执行令，对被告人贾敬龙依法执行了死刑。至此，贾敬龙故意杀人案永远划上了句号。但该案引起的争议却远没有停止。本文从该案的事实、情节、判决等方面入手，来探讨该案的判决是否符合我国当下的刑事政策，是否达到了客观、公正的标准，从而层层剖析，最终得出应然的结论。具体内容如下： 引言部分简单介绍了贾敬龙故意杀人案死刑问题研究的意义。 正文第一部分的主要内容是贾敬龙故意杀人案案情、裁判及法理问题。通过介绍案件基本事实、裁判及执行情况，阐述该案的司法争议及学界关于本案的争议问题。并进一步从法理角度分析该案在量刑等方面存在诸多问题。 正文第二部分的主要内容是贾敬龙故意杀人案的死刑适用分析。本案的核心问题是死刑适用问题，即应否对贾敬龙适用死刑立即执行，或者说是可以不可以对其判处死刑缓期执行。此部分围绕这一问题展开论述。 正文第三部分的主要内容是关于贾敬龙故意杀人案的死刑执行命令等有关问题的探讨。具体对本案死刑执行命令存在的问题以及死刑执行命令制度进行了分析。认为死刑执行命令及其签发本身应该属于司法行政性质，应该改变目前由最高人民法院院长作为死刑执行命令签发主体的制度。应该在立法上做出明确规定，以明确在死刑核准之后，最高人民法院院长签发死刑执行命令的时限。另外，死刑执行命令下达的具体时限目前在立法上尚处于空白，以及与此相关的其它问题也应予以明确。 正文第四部分的主要内容是依据我国现有的死刑政策，以贾敬龙案为例，浅析该政策在个案中的贯彻及执行情况。从死刑政策的概念与意义、贾敬龙故意杀人罪案死刑政策评价、本案中死刑政策贯彻的立场及方法等方面分析，认为对贾敬龙适用死刑立即执行违背了死刑适用的政策与精神 结语部分对贾敬龙故意杀人案所涉及死刑问题的立法、司法问题以及学理研究等作了总结，认为死刑的慎用与废止仍在路上，任重而道远。

Based on the basic case, the referee results and the implementation of the intentional homicide case of Jia Jinglong, the relevant judicial disputes and theoretical disputes surrounding the case were analyzed from the perspective of jurisprudence. It was found that there were many problems in the sentencing and other aspects of the case. The core issue of the case was that whether the death penalty should be applied to Jia Jinglong immediately. Based on the analysis of the concepts and their mutual relations in the death penalty system, behavior of Jia Jinglong was "extremely serious crimes". However Jia Jinglong belonged to the situation that "it must not be implemented immediately". On the whole, we came to the conclusion that Jia Jinglong was sentenced to death penalty with a two-year reprieve. There were certain problems in the execution of death sentences of the case of Jia Jinglong. Through the analysis and discussion of the execution of the death penalty order system, it can be found that the death penalty execution order and its issuance itself should belong to the judicial administrative nature. At present, the system in which the president of the Supreme Court of the People's Republic of China as the main body issuing the order for execution of death penalty should be changed. Provisions should be made clear in the legislation, to clarify the time limit for execution of execution orders by the President of the Supreme People’s Court after the death penalty has been approved. In addition, it should also make it clear the specific deadline for the execution of death sentences, after the death penalty order was issued. For the execution of death sentences and the execution of death orders issued, they should be open and timely informed of the executed and their relatives. In general, the legislative provisions on the issuance and execution of death sentences should have more space and flexibility. When the Supreme People's Court President issued the death penalty execution order, it should also carry out a substantive review of death penalty cases, and the appropriate extension of execution deadline delivery. According to the existing death penalty policy in our country, implementation and enforcement of this policy in individual cases were analyzed, taking the case of Jia Jinglong as an example. From the concept and significance of the death penalty policy, Jia Jinglong's death penalty evaluation for intentional homicide crimes, and the position and method of implementing the death penalty policy in this case, Jia Jinglong's immediate application of the death penalty violated the application of the death penalty policy and spirit.