于欢案的宪法学分析  

A Constitutional Analysis of Yu Huan's Case

作　　者：骆正言[1,2,3] 

机构地区：[1]南京师范大学法学院 [2]中国法治现代化研究院 [3]江苏开放大学公共管理学院

出　　处：《法治现代化研究》2018年第2期110-121,共12页Law and Modernization

基　　金：2017年度教育部人文社会科学研究一般项目"学术批评侵犯名誉权案判决标准研究"(17YJA820019);2016年度江苏省博士后科研资助计划项目"时事评论中语言暴力侵权裁判标准研究"(1601146C)的阶段性成果

摘　　要：2017年3月引发媒体强烈关注的于欢案,于当年6月做出了二审判决,判决肯定了学术界和舆论界对于欢正当防卫的定性,并以防卫过当为由将一审判决的无期徒刑酌减为五年有期徒刑。这样的结果应该是令人满意的,但二审判决以行为目的而不是行为本身来评判逼债行为的正当性,以及二审判决机械对待正当防卫的均衡性原则的做法,仍是有失公允的。特别是在保护防卫人的人身自由权、性自决权和住宅不受侵犯权等基本权利方面,二审判决及其所依据的刑法规范做得尚不够充分。概括来讲,不能简单将索债型非法拘禁行为界定为非法拘禁罪,而应以抢劫罪和绑架罪论处,也不能完全禁止以致死的手段防卫严重的强制猥亵妇女行为,最后还应该扩大侵入住宅罪的"住宅"的适用范围,为侵犯住宅罪设置无限防卫权。Yu Huan＇s case, which had been tried in March 2017 and immediately attracted intense public attention, was retried in June 2017. The court accepted some scholars＇ opinion that Yu Huan＇s action should be regarded as self-defense, and accordingly reduced his sentence to five-year imprisonment for his excessive use of force in self-defense. The results were satisfactory, but the judgement was still unfair in that it accepted the creditors＇ pressing for payment as justified according to their motivations rather than their behavior itself and mechanically applied the balance principle concerning self-defense. Especially in terms of the protection of fundamental human rights such as personal liberty, sexual self-determination and inviolability of domicile, the judgement of the second trial is defective due to the inadequacy in China＇s criminal law. For example, illegal detention to force debt payment should not be only convicted of crime of illegal detention but should be regarded as robbery and kidnapping. Serious indecent assault of a woman should allow self-defense by fatal force. Finally, the crime of illegal trespass of residence should be broadened in scope of application and the victim should be given the right to infinite self-defense.

关 键 词：于欢案 防卫过当 人身自由权 性自决权 住宅不受侵犯权 

分 类 号：D920.5[政治法律—法学] D924.3