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:雷富阳 张曦 LEI Fuyang;ZHANG Xi(Shanghai Hansheng Law Firm,Shanghai 200120,China;School of Law,Xiamen University,Xiamen 361005,Fujian,China)
机构地区:[1]上海汉盛律师事务所,上海200120 [2]厦门大学法学院,福建厦门361005
出 处:《萍乡学院学报》2025年第1期62-66,共5页Journal of Pingxiang University
摘 要:在中国式现代化的背景下,法治建设需立足国情,实现高质量立法与制度设计,充分尊重和保障人权。未成年人犯罪记录封存制度作为刑事司法领域对未成年人权益保护的重要体现,历经十余年发展后规范性显著提升,但封存标准仍存在模糊性,信息查询、保护机制尚不健全,相关制度配合效果有限。有必要从公共秩序与个体保护的利益衡量视角出发,深入探讨未成年人犯罪记录封存制度的逻辑基础,坚持未成年人实质保护的立场,优化封存标准、信息管理、权利救济等制度规范,并通过规范协同促进该制度的效能化。Under the framework of Chinese-style modernization,legal system construction requires context-sensitive institutional design that respects and safeguards human rights.The sealing system for juvenile criminal records,as a crucial embodiment of minors'rights protection in criminal justice,has achieved significant standardization over its decade-long development.However,challenges persist regarding ambiguous sealing criteria,inadequate information management mechanisms,and limited institutional coordination.This study employs an interest-balancing perspective between public order maintenance and individual rights protection to explore the system's theoretical foundations.Advocating substantive protection for minors,we propose optimizing institutional norms through three dimensions:refining sealing standards,enhancing digital information governance,and improving rights remediation mechanisms.Furthermore,institutional synergies should be strengthened to maximize systemic efficacy,thereby achieving equilibrium between societal security imperatives and juvenile rehabilitation needs within the socialist rule of law.
关 键 词:利益衡量 未成年人犯罪记录封存制度 公共秩序 个体保护 未成年人保护
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:216.73.216.38