非法占用草原犯罪的实证分析与立法检视  

Empirical analysis and legislative review on the crime of illegal occupation of grasslands

作　　者：卫迎杰 魏华 WEI Yingjie;WEI Hua(Department of Law,School of Humanities and Social Sciences,Beijing Forestry University,Beijing 100083,China)

机构地区：[1]北京林业大学人文社会科学学院法学系,北京100083

出　　处：《草业科学》2024年第4期1020-1027,共8页Pratacultural Science

基　　金：北京市社会科学基金一般项目“北京市土地‘确权确股(利)’方式的立法规制与司法救济”(18FXB012)。

摘　　要：2012年《最高人民法院关于审理破坏草原资源刑事案件应用法律若干问题的解释》出台,非法占用草原犯罪的刑事处罚有了具体的法律指导。本研究采用实证分析方法,对非法占用草原犯罪的行为类型、裁判结果、量刑因素、减刑情节等司法现状进行研究分析。结果表明,非法占用草原犯罪存在犯罪行为类型不均衡、犯罪构成要件认定模糊、裁判量刑较为随意的问题。研究认为其原因在于立法层面对草原生态法益重视不足、犯罪构成要件不够明确、刑罚档次缺乏区分度、刑罚手段过于传统4个方面。故研究提出相关立法建议:设置独立罪名;统一定罪标准,明确“大量毁坏”内涵;细化法定刑档次;设置多元化刑罚手段。The Interpretation of the Supreme People’s Court on Several Issues Concerning the Application of Law in the Trial of Criminal Cases of Destroying Grassland Resources was issued in 2012,providing specific legal guidance for the criminal punishment of illegal occupation of grasslands.This study used empirical analysis to examine the judicial status of the types of behaviors,adjudication results,sentencing factors,mitigating circumstances,and other judicial statuses of the crime of illegally occupying grasslands.The results show that the crime of illegally occupying grassland has the problems of unbalanced types of criminal behavior,ambiguous identification of the crime elements,and more arbitrary adjudication and sentencing.The study concluded that this is due to four aspects:insufficient attention to grassland ecological legal interests at the legislative level,lack of clarity in the elements of the crime,lack of differentiation in the grade of penalties,and overly traditional means of penalties.Therefore,the study proposes relevant legislative recommendations:to set up independent crimes,to standardize conviction criteria and clarify the connotation of“substantial destruction”,to refine the legal penalty levels,and to set up diversified penal means.

关 键 词：非法占用草原 大量毁坏 生态法益 量刑 定罪标准 罪刑相适应 刑罚辅助性措施 

分 类 号：D924.3[政治法律—刑法学]