人工智能的多元刑事治理:理论建构与路径选择  

Pluralistic Criminal Governance of Artificial Intelligence:Theoretical Constructs and Routing Choice

作　　者：莫晓宇[1] Mo Xiao-yu(School of Law,Sichuan University,Chengdu 610064,Sichuan)

机构地区：[1]四川大学法学院,四川成都610064

出　　处：《厦门大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2023年第4期54-66,共13页Journal of Xiamen University(A Bimonthly for Studies in Arts & Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目“总体国家安全观视域下网络犯罪治理对策研究”(20&ZD200)。

摘　　要：伴随技术迭代、产业融合与社会渗透,人工智能催生出了刑事治理的强烈需求。以个体法益保护为主线、以事后惩治为主张、以实害结果为主因、以国家垄断刑法规制为主轴的传统刑事治理体系,已经难以充分应对人工智能时代的理论挑战与实践困境。合理吸收“一元-多元”“封闭-开放”的治理诉求,进行多元理念、多元结构、多元主体、多元形式、多元方法的理论解构与重塑,能够为更具包容性与开放性的刑事治理方案提供理论支撑。在具体的路径选择上,我们有必要推进和展开分类分级治理、预防治理、合作治理、复合治理、全周期治理等多元刑事治理实践,从而合理地调试出人工智能刑事治理的最优决策。With the technological iteration,industrial integration,and social penetration of artificial intelligence,a strong demand for criminal governance has emerged.However,the traditional criminal governance system prioritizes the protection of individual legal interests,imposes punishment after the fact based on actual harm,and relies on the national monopoly criminal law as the main regulatory framework.As a result,this system is facing significant theoretical and practical challenges in the era of artificial intelligence.Therefore,it is crucial to incorporate the governance demands of"unitary-pluralism"and"closure-openness",and deconstruct and reshape the theories of pluralistic concepts,structures,subjects,and methodological forms to provide theoretical support for a more inclusive and open criminal governance system.In terms of concrete implementation,it is necessary to promote and develop multiple criminal governance approaches,such as classification and grading governance,preventive governance,cooperative governance,composite governance,and fullcycle governance,to achieve the most optimal decision-making in artificial intelligence criminal governance.

关 键 词：人工智能 刑事治理 合作治理 预防刑法 全周期治理 

分 类 号：D924.6[政治法律—刑法学]