我国异种自由刑并罚原则的反思与重构  

A Reflection and Reconstruction about Different Kinds of Freedom Punishment in China

作　　者：张建军[1] Zhang Jianjun

机构地区：[1]华中科技大学法学院,湖北武汉430074

出　　处：《法学杂志》2017年第9期73-82,共10页Law Science Magazine

摘　　要：长期以来,异种自由刑的并罚在我国刑法立法中处于空白。为回应实践的需要并平息理论界的争议,《刑法修正案(九)》第4条对异种自由刑的并罚原则作出了明确的规定。然而,该规定并没能使学界在此问题上的争议尘埃落定,相反,其自身的合理性值得检讨和质疑,比如导致刑罚结果不公正、在逻辑上出现悖论、违背罪责刑相适应原则、不利于刑罚目的的实现等,故建议在有期徒刑与拘役并罚时,在将拘役换算成有期徒刑的基础上以限制加重原则进行并罚;在有期徒刑与管制、拘役与管制并罚时,应采用吸收原则,只执行有期徒刑、拘役。For a long time, how to combine penalties for different kinds of freedom punish- ment is blank in Chinese criminal law. In response to practical needs and quell the theoretical disputes, article 4 of the Ninth amendment to the criminal law made clear rules about the princi- ples for this issue. However, the rationality of this rule is worthy of review and doubt, such as it canled to unfair punishment, cause logical paradox, violate the principle of balanced punishment, cannot realize the purpose of punishment, etc. Therefore, in the case of fixed -term im- prisonment and criminal detention, first, criminal detention should be converted into imprisonment, second, in accordance with the principle of restrictions on aggravating to punish; In the ease of fixed -term imprisonment and control, or criminal detention and control, the principle of absorption shall be adopted, the offender should be sentenced to fixed - term imprisonment or criminal detention.

关 键 词：异种自由刑 《刑法修正案(九)》数罪并罚 刑罚 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]