企业自行监测与“不得强迫自证其罪”的冲突和解决  

The Conflict and Resolution between Enterprise Self-Monitoring and “No Forced Self-Incrimination”

作　　者：丁相中 

机构地区：[1]江南大学法学院,江苏 无锡

出　　处：《法学（汉斯）》2023年第6期4713-4719,共7页Open Journal of Legal Science

摘　　要：当前我国正大步迈入数字经济时代,企业自行监测作为环保领域数字化转型的一项重要制度,对于环境治理具有重要意义。然而,企业根据自行监测所获取的监测数据有可能成为企业违法犯罪的不利证据,企业面临着因自我提供的证据从而导致陷入“强迫自证其罪”的题难,这与“不得强迫自证其罪”原则的精神实质不相符合。本文认为,企业自行监测与“不得强迫自证其罪”原则存在着冲突,但自行监测作为法定义务和社会责任对冲突有一定的合理性解释,从合理性角度上论证只能证明自行监测制度的存在是合理的,但不能实质性解决冲突。为寻求解决路径,本文从企业权利和法律价值的角度,平衡两者的冲突,最后将社会信用制度引入环保领域,从冲突的量、冲突的质以及自行监测制度的局限性三个层面分析冲突,提出优化路径。At present, China is stepping into the era of digital economy, and enterprise self-monitoring, as an important system of digital transformation in the field of environmental protection, is of great significance for environmental governance. However, the monitoring data obtained by enterprises according to their own monitoring may become the adverse evidence of enterprises’ illegal crimes, and enterprises are faced with the problem of “self-incrimination” due to the evidence provided by themselves, which is inconsistent with the spirit of the principle of “shall not force self-incrimination”. This paper holds that there is a conflict between enterprise self-monitoring and the principle of “no forced self-incrimination”, but self-monitoring, as a legal obligation and social responsibility, has a certain reasonable explanation for the conflict. From the perspective of rationality, the argument can only prove that the existence of self-monitoring system is reasonable, but cannot substantially solve the conflict. In order to find a solution, this paper balances the conflict between enterprise rights and legal value, finally introduces the social credit system into the field of environmental protection, analyzes the conflict from three aspects: The quantity of the conflict, the quality of the conflict and the limitations of the self-monitoring system, and puts forward an optimization path.

关 键 词：企业自行监测 不得强迫自证其罪 冲突 信任制度 环境保护 

分 类 号：D92[政治法律—法学]