风险社会积极刑法观的贯彻及其限度  

The Implementation and Control of Positive Criminal Law View in the Risk Society

作　　者：张建军[1] 王博 ZHANG Jianjun;WANG Bo(Law School,Lanzhou University,Lanzhou 730000,China)

机构地区：[1]兰州大学法学院,兰州730000

出　　处：《西南政法大学学报》2023年第3期145-156,共12页Journal of Southwest University of Political Science and Law

摘　　要：风险社会中新生危险源与不安全因素层出不穷,为积极刑法观提供了社会条件。积极刑法观在理念、立法与司法层面分别表现为积极参与社会治理、推进犯罪化与重用扩大解释。对积极刑法观持否定立场的学者,表达了对积极刑法观过度强调刑法的社会保护机能、违背法益保护主义与刑法谦抑性的担忧,但均难以成立。为与激进刑法观相区分,应理性界定积极刑法观的积极限度,在刑事立法层面,应秉持理性与谨慎态度,只有当新的危害行为无法为既有罪名的构成要件所评价时,才应考虑刑事立法这一路径,且在立法工作中,应避免对公众舆论的过度回应;在刑事司法层面,通过发挥司法解释和指导性案例的指引功能,合理适用“但书”规定出罪,肯定犯罪成立范围与处罚范围之分离。New hazards and unsafe factors constantly emerge in the risk society,which provides social conditions for the positive criminal law view.The positive criminal law view is manifested as actively participating in social governance,promoting criminalization and reinterpreting notions,legislation and judicature respectively.Scholars who hold a negative view on the positive criminal law view express concern that it overemphasizes the social protection function of criminal law,violates the legal interest protectionism and lacks modesty and restraint of criminal law,but it is difficult to invalidate the view.To differentiate from the radical criminal law view,we should rationally define the positive limit of the positive criminal law view.From the perspective of criminal legislation,we should hold a rational and cautious attitude,and consider criminal legislation only when the new harmful behavior cannot be included by the elements of the existing charge.In legislative work,we should avoid excessive responses to public opinion.From the perspective of criminal justice,we can give full play to the guiding function of judicial interpretation and guiding cases,and the proviso should be reasonably applicable to the crime,affirming the separation between the scope of crime establishment and punishment.

关 键 词：风险社会 积极刑法观 法益保护 刑法谦抑性 

分 类 号：DF611[政治法律—刑法学]