《联合国反腐败公约》中的“影响力交易”与中国刑法的对接  

“Trading in Influence”in the United Nations Convention against Corruption and the Connection of China’s Criminal Law

作　　者：李卫红 许振宇 LI Wei-hong;XU Zhen-yu(School of Political Science and Law,University of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences,Beijing 100089,China)

机构地区：[1]中国社会科学院大学政法学院,北京100089

出　　处：《天津法学》2020年第2期5-11,共7页Tianjin Legal Science

摘　　要：中国作为《联合国反腐败公约》的缔约国,依照《维也纳条约法公约》的规定,应履行其中的“影响力交易”条款。“影响力交易”在我国《刑法》中有相关规定,但在受托人的一般与特殊、影响力的直接与间接、“给予”行为的阶段性、不正当好处与财产性利益、被利用的公职人员的处罚等方面与《联合国反腐败公约》中的相关规定均存在差异。犯罪主体不可扩大到任何人;贿赂物的内容应当为满足人的物质或精神需求的“不正当好处”,利用职务上的便利应当扩大到“间接利用”;不能将“给予”行为提前到“许诺给予”和“提议给予”,这在理论上可以被推理论证成立,但在司法实践中,司法机关难以对此认定。As a contracting party to the United Nations Convention against Corruption,China should implement the“Trading in influence”clause in accordance with the provisions of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.“Trading in influence”has relevant provisions in China’s Criminal Law,but there are differences between the general and special of the trustee,the direct and indirect of influence,the stage of“giving”behavior,the improper benefits and property interests,the punishment of the utilized public officials and other relevant provisions in the United Nations Convention against Corruption.The subject of crime can’t be extended to anyone;the content of bribery should be“improper benefits”to meet people’s material or spiritual needs,and the use of post convenience should be extended to“indirect use”;the act of“giving”can’t be advanced to“promised giving”and“proposed giving”,which can be reasoned and proved in theory,but in judicial practice,it’s difficult for judicial organs to determine this.

关 键 词：联合国反腐败公约 影响力交易 斡旋受贿 实际给予 

分 类 号：DF979[政治法律—国际法学]