检索规则说明:AND代表“并且”;OR代表“或者”;NOT代表“不包含”;(注意必须大写,运算符两边需空一格)
检 索 范 例 :范例一: (K=图书馆学 OR K=情报学) AND A=范并思 范例二:J=计算机应用与软件 AND (U=C++ OR U=Basic) NOT M=Visual
作 者:单奕铭 SHAN Yi-ming(School of Law,Henan University of Technology,Zhengzhou 450001,China)
出 处:《政法学刊》2024年第2期49-56,共8页Journal of Political Science and Law
基 金:国家社会科学基金青年项目(23CFX058);河南工业大学高层次人才基金项目(2020SBS04)。
摘 要:伴随终身监禁的设立和适用,法学理论界存在扩张终身监禁适用范围的观点。在我国废止死刑进程中,应否寻求死刑替代措施、终身自由刑能否作为死刑替代措施一直以来存在着分歧。不得减刑、假释的终身监禁在一般预防和特殊预防方面的功能存在缺陷,与刑法立法科学化存在一定的抵牾。限制终身监禁适用范围具有立法上的必要性和现实中的合理性,在当前的刑事立法中,应将终身监禁限制在贪污受贿犯罪范畴之内,不宜扩张适用。With the establishment and application of life imprisonment,legal theorists have the view of expanding the scope of application of life imprisonment.In the process of abolishing the death penalty in China,there have always been differences as to whether we should seek alternative measures for the death penalty and whether life-long freedom punishment can be used as an alternative measure for the death penalty.Life imprisonment without commutation or parole has defects in the functions of general prevention and special prevention,which is inconsistent with the scientific legislation of criminal law.Limiting the scope of application of life imprisonment is necessary in legislation and reasonable in reality.In the current criminal legislation,life imprisonment should be limited to the crime of embezzlement and bribery and should not be expanded.
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在载入数据...
正在链接到云南高校图书馆文献保障联盟下载...
云南高校图书馆联盟文献共享服务平台 版权所有©
您的IP:216.73.216.7