论行业技术标准对空白罪状的补充  

On the Supplement of Industry Technical Standards to the Blank Facts about a Crime

作　　者：冷必元[1] Leng Biyuan(School of Law,Hunan University of Technology,Zhuzhou,Hunan 412000)

机构地区：[1]湖南工业大学法学院,湖南株洲412000

出　　处：《河南财经政法大学学报》2023年第5期68-79,共12页Journal of Henan University of Economics and Law

基　　金：2020年国家社会科学基金项目“刑法定性与行业技术标准对接研究”(项目编号:20BFX057)的阶段性成果。

摘　　要：技术标准具有填补空白罪状的作用。刑法适用中援引技术标准作为填补空白罪状的补充规范,已是司法实务的常态。但是,法律保留观念、法律专属主义对技术标准作为空白罪状补充规范的资格提出了质疑。鉴于技术标准制定过程所受行政干扰小于行政法规、行政规章的客观事实,应当认为技术标准作为空白罪状补充规范,不会导致法律专属主义担忧的行政权力肆虐危险。同时,鉴于技术标准是产业运行客观规律的表达,将技术标准作为除“违反国家规定”之外的其他空白罪状的补充规范不会违背立法民主主义要求。用技术标准填补该类空白罪状,为刑法实现对技术微观层面的风险管控提供了可能。Technical standards have the function of filling in the blank facts about a crime.It has been a common judicial practice to invoke technical standards in the application of criminal law as supplementary norms to fill the blank facts.However,the concept of legal reservation and legal exclusivism have questioned the eligibility of technical standards as supplementary norms for blank facts.In view of the objective fact that the administrative interference in the formulation process of technical standards is less than administrative regulations and administrative rules,it should be considered that technical standards as supplementary norms for blank facts will not lead to the danger of unbridled administrative power worried by legal exclusivism.At the same time,in view of the fact that technical standards are the expression of the objective laws of industrial operation,the technical standards as a supplement to blank facts other than“violation of state regulations”will not violate the requirements of legislative democracy.The use of technical standards to fill such blank facts provides a possibility for the criminal law to realize the risk control on the micro level of technology.

关 键 词：技术标准 空白罪状 补充规范 法律专属主义 

分 类 号：D924.1[政治法律—刑法学]