A LIMITING APPROACH TO CRIMINAL LIABILITY OF STATE ORGANS  

国家机关刑事责任限制论（英文）

作　　者：周振杰 

机构地区：[1]the College for Criminal Law Science of Beijing Normal University

出　　处：《China Legal Science》2017年第4期4-24,共21页中国法学（英文版）

摘　　要：This article holds that criminal liability of state organs is acceptable from the standpoints of the Constitution, judicial practice, the purpose of punishment and comparative law, and the deep involvement of state organs in economic activities making it necessary to use criminal penalties to effectively regulate their activities. Meanwhile, it suggests that the differences between state organs and commercial organizations being recognized and legislators impose restraints on the criminal liability of state organs by requiring the existence of a specific victim or obligation. Moreover, although the criminal liability of the People＇s Court has virtually no advocates in China now, this article insists that the People＇s Court can assume categorized as ＂state organs ＂under the criminal liability because they are Constitution and their positions in the national political structure as executive organs with the will of the legislature and the Party causes them to behave as administrative authorities rather than as organs in a checks-and-balances relationship with legislative and executive branches.从宪法、刑法、司法实践、刑罚目的、比较法等角度来看,国家机关刑事责任是可以接受的。国家机关在许多场合作为平等主体实施经济活动,因此有必要通过刑法规制国家机关在经济活动中的违法行为。但是,国家机关有其特殊性,应该通过立法限制国家机关刑事责任的范围,比如要求具体被害人或者具体义务的存在等。此外,尽管绝大部分学者基于权力分立的理由反对人民法院的刑事责任,但是从其在国家机构中的地位出发,我们不能完全引用西方的理论来评价其刑事责任问题。而且,人民法院如同其它国家机关一样,也可能以平等主体从事经济活动,在这些场合追究其刑事责任在法律上可以接受。

关 键 词：国家机关 刑事责任 限制论 经济活动 平等主体 刑法规制 人民法院 司法实践 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]