刑法干预前置化的理性反思  

Rational Reflection on the Early Intervention of Criminal Law

作　　者：王强军[1] Wang Qiangjun

机构地区：[1]南开大学法学院

出　　处：《中国法学》2021年第3期229-247,共19页China Legal Science

基　　金：2018年度国家社科基金一般项目“刑罚处罚早期化的限制与理论应对研究”(项目批准号:18BFX106)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：针对特定犯罪刑法干预前置化的表面预防效果容易诱使人们夸大其立法效果,推动其从零星的个别立法行为升级为得到立法机关概念性界定的立法政策。刑法干预前置化不仅容易出现由于对行为造成危害后果的严重性和高度盖然性评估不足导致的适用不当并进一步造成刑法的滥用,其积极一般预防效果也无法得到证实。故此,应当限制刑法干预前置化无节制的扩张适用。适用原则方面:坚守刑法的最后手段性,遏制刑法干预前置化成为常态化的立法政策。适用范围方面:限定其所可能适用的领域和保护法益的类型。适用后果方面:限制其可能给公民个人自由造成的伤害。即便是必须采取刑法干预前置化,也要精准评估行为的危害性,科学确立"刑法最后有效干预点",建构配套出罪机制、刑罚制度、附随后果限制机制,实现刑法干预前置化的"入罪出罪"兼顾以及"罪刑两端"均衡。It is easy to tempt people to exaggerate the legislative effect of the early intervention of criminal law for specific crimes,and promote it to the legislative policy defined by the legislature.The early intervention of criminal law is not only prone to the improper application due to the insufficient evaluation of the seriousness and high probability of harmful consequences,but also leads to the abuse of criminal law,and its effect of positive general prevention cannot be confirmed.We should limit the early intervention of criminal law.In terms of applicable principles,we should obey the principle of last resort of criminal law,and prevent it from becoming a normalized legislative policy.In terms of scope of application,we should limit the scope of its application and the type of protection of legal interests.In terms of the application of consequences,we should limit the harm it may cause to the freedom of citizens.It is necessary to accurately assess the harm of the behavior and scientifically establish the’last effective intervention point’of criminal law,construct the supporting mechanism of penalty system and the mechanism of limiting the collateral consequences of conviction,in order to realize the balance of’criminalization and decriminalization’and the balance of’crime and punishment’.

关 键 词：刑法干预前置化 刑法最后有效干预点 积极一般预防 刑法谦抑性 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]