保护性管辖权的国际法问题研究

发布时间：2018-04-25 15:36

本文选题：保护性管辖权 + 构成要件　；参考：《华东政法大学》2012年博士论文

【摘要】：国际法中的管辖权是一个国际法的基本理论。管辖权涉及国际法最核心的问题，即谁来管辖案件、谁来审判案件、谁来执行案件。在国际法的一般理论中，管辖权分为属地管辖权、属人管辖权、保护性管辖权和普遍性管辖权。在这一管辖权理论体系中，属地、属人和普遍管辖权在学术界研究得较多，但是对于保护性管辖权的研究却鲜见论著。保护性管辖权是属于国际刑事法律的范畴，其所针对的是具有涉外因素的犯罪行为。对具有涉外因素的犯罪，大多表现为外国人实施的犯罪行为位于外国境内，而犯罪结果或犯罪对象则是侵害了管辖国的国家或国民的利益。所以，一国国内的刑事法律规定了保护性管辖权，这有利于保护内国的利益免受来自外国犯罪行为的侵害。可是，保护性管辖权法律制度本身在国内立法中也显得比较原则化，并没有规定相应的具体措施。与这种情况有着相应联系的是，各国在其国内刑事法律的立法文件中，都对本国实施保护性管辖权做了规定。国际立法文件中也出现了关于保护性管辖权的规定，随着这些规定零星地分布在国际立法文件中，缺乏一种体系感，保护性管辖权在国际立法的具体规定中，只是起到了一种原则性的指引作用。具体如何界定保护性管辖权，如何认定保护性管辖权中的要件，如何具体实施保护性管辖权都没有具体的规定。因此，保护性管辖权虽然已有立法规范，但是其还是停留在管辖权原则的阶段，将此原则付诸具体实施的法律制度还是不够健全的，甚至是缺失的。本文写作的目的就在于将保护性管辖权做细致的分析，从管辖权的基本理论入手，补充保护性管辖权理论中的某些内容，在传统保护性管辖权理论的基础上，探讨保护性管辖权的实施机制。本文的导言从选题意义和角度、国内外研究现状、研究的主要方法三个方面进行论述。其一，从选题意义和角度出发，说明选择保护性管辖权作为论文选题的目的，是考虑到实施域外管辖的社会背景已经发生了极大的变化，越来越多的犯罪行为并不仅仅局限于一个国家的领域内，更多的犯罪行为其准备、实施以及犯罪后果都远远超越了国家之间的界限，因而涉外性质的犯罪活动成为了各国国内刑法针对的主要目标。薛捍勤女士在2006年于日内瓦召开的国际法委员会第五十八届会议上做了有关国家行使域外管辖权的专题报告，在其中她提到“当国家主张域外管辖权时，是在没有国际法有关规则的情况下试图以本国立法、司法或执行措施而管辖在境外影响其利益的人、财产或行为。在国内法的专门领域内，主要是刑法和商法，由于境外的人、财产或行为更可能影响其利益，所以一国行使域外管辖权具有更普遍的倾向”，所以作为域外管辖权中的一种，保护性管辖权也应该从法律的角度出发，将保护性管辖权予以具体化和制度化。论文将论证保护性管辖权行使的条件，以及如何将保护性管辖权进行实施作为重点，使得保护性管辖权并不流于形式，而是实实在在地将该管辖权制度落实到实处。其二，，通过国内外研究现状的阐述，表明目前对于保护性管辖权的研究还不够深入。从中国研究该管辖权来看，有关这方面的论文与学术著作非常稀少，并且研究都局限于保护性管辖权的实施机制中，对于如何认定行使保护性管辖权的条件，是存在着研究空白的；从外国研究保护性管辖权来看，有关保护性管辖权的研究也是不系统与不全面的，因而对于保护性管辖权进行系统全面的理论研究是有必要的。其三，通过不同的研究方法对于保护性管辖权进行全面的阐述，例如通过文本研究的方法可以对保护性管辖权所依据的立法文件进行系统的梳理；通过案例研究的方法可以对保护性管辖权在实践中的表现有一个全面的了解，这也有利于对各类保护性管辖权实施措施进行有效的评价，通过比较的方法来分析各类措施的优劣，以此做出最好的判断。本文的第一章主要概述了保护性管辖权，分为三个方面的内容，即保护性管辖权的概念和特征、历史演变，保护性管辖权的依据、法律渊源和保护性管辖权与其他管辖权之间的区别。通过这三个方面的概述，起到如下三个作用：（1）介绍保护性管辖权的基本理论和法律依据，为国家行使保护性管辖权寻找合理的法律依据；（2）保护性管辖权在国际法机制中的地位，是依赖于保护性管辖权法律渊源的，通过列举和分析国际法文件中涉及到的保护性管辖权以及各国国内法中有关保护性管辖权的规定，对保护性管辖权法律渊源的认定可以有一个正确的认识；（3）保护性管辖权与属地管辖权、属人管辖权和普遍性管辖权之间存在着明显的区别，本章的第三节通过比较的方法，将保护性管辖权与另外三种管辖权进行了区分，明确了保护性管辖权在理论和内容上与这三种管辖权的界线。第一章是为之后论述保护性管辖权的构成和实施机制打下基础，只有在理论和法律渊源上加以认定才能使保护性管辖权在法律上站得住脚。本文第二章展开对保护性管辖权基本构成要件的阐述，结合刑法的基本理论剖析了保护性管辖权的基本要素，从犯罪地点、犯罪结果、犯罪主体、犯罪客体和指向的犯罪对象、犯罪罪行上的要求入手，构建起了保护性管辖权构成要素体系。在这一部分，犯罪地点分为犯罪行为发生地和犯罪结果发生地，着重分析了两个连接因素，找出犯罪行为发生地与犯罪结果发生地间存在的关系。接着对犯罪主体中的国籍问题展开论证，将不同的犯罪主体在保护性管辖权中的情况做了详细描述，例如论及当犯罪主体为双重或者多重国籍人时该如何认定和处理；例外，对“外国人”的概念做了扩展性的理解，将具有外国国籍的法人也纳入到犯罪主体的范围内来，这样做是为了有效扩展了保护性管辖权的适用范围，让国家面对来自外国的侵害时更有效地保护本国和本国公民的利益。本章中也论述了对犯罪罪行的要求，在保护性管辖权概念中提到只有当外国人的犯罪行为影响到内国的政治、经济安全等重大利益时，才可以适用该管辖权。因此保护性管辖权对犯罪罪行的要求与其他管辖权是有所不同的，所以从犯罪损害的客体和刑期的特定要求展开论述，以这两方面来说明保护性管辖权对于罪行的特殊要求是比较恰当的。论述保护性管辖权的要件是认定保护性管辖权的前提条件，即在何种情况下可以主张保护性管辖权。本文第三章主要从保护性管辖权在特殊领域内的表现形式做了细致的分析，本章在论述时始终贯穿前一章节中所论及的犯罪地点和犯罪主体。因为在某些特殊的领域内所能体现出的保护性管辖权与一般情形时是不同的，这里的特殊犯罪地点主要包括了航空器内的犯罪、海上犯罪，主要是领海之外的区域即毗连区、专属经济区、公海的保护性管辖权，此外还包括南北极地区和外层空间的保护性管辖权。特殊的犯罪主体主要包括了无国籍人和拥有豁免权人，当面对着此类犯罪主体时，行使保护性管辖权也与一般情形时不同。本章主要将保护性管辖权在一般情形以外的例外纳入到整个保护性管辖权体系中，这样就使保护性管辖权的理论趋于完整，并有利于进一步对保护性管辖权的深入研究。本文第四章主要论述保护性管辖权实施中的引渡措施，并与第五章的国家绑架行为相并列。在本章中，从传统引渡措施到引渡措施实施中的困难，目前困难的原因是多种的，例如：多以双边引渡条约为主的形式，使得引渡的实施只能采取国家对国家的形式，但不适合跨国性的刑事犯罪，因为其导致的直接后果就是涉案国家众多，不可能要求每一个国家与另外一个国家之间都签订双边引渡条约；另一个是政治的影响，使得被请求引渡的国家不愿意将罪犯交给对方受审，而希望由本国主张属地管辖权来受理、审判和执行。另外，本章还论述了当外国人在外国犯罪时，其又恰好拥有该国国籍的问题，即保护性管辖权与属人管辖权相冲突时的处理。这又需要对国民不引渡原则做更新的诠释和理解，在传统做法中，国民不引渡原则限制了保护性管辖权的行使，所以若要针对上述情况则要引入一些新的机制来解决，以扩大保护性管辖权的适用范围。本文的第五章主要论述保护性管辖权实施中的另一种措施，即国家绑架行为，目前这种行为被大多数国家和国际社会视为违反国际法基本原则，但在实践中也存在着相关的案例，并且美国在实施保护性管辖权时有时会采取这种措施。因而本章介绍了国家绑架行为的产生和发展过程，并对其是否具有国际法上的合法性做了论证。这一章从国家绑架行为产生的凯尔规则入手，分析了国家绑架行为的法律问题，并且通过凯尔规则以外的几个例外原则，例如特定罪名、条约明示和骇人行为原则来排除适用国家绑架行为。之后对于国家绑架行为合法性的分析，结合庇护国主张反对的权利，得出违法性的结论。此外还分析了国家绑架行为目前是否已经构成国际习惯法，对美国在以往所实施的国家绑架行为做出了评价。因为从美国实施的此种行为，虽然可以起到保护性管辖权本来的作用，但是事实是大多数国家和国际社会都反对美国采取这种行为，因为这种行为无疑会损害一个主权国家的属地与属人管辖权，滥用的话则会扰乱正常的司法程序，虽然保护性管辖权实施的措施从目前来看还是受到了较多局限，像美国这样的国家通过国内立法赋予国家绑架行为合法性，与国际社会对于此种措施的认知是相悖的，所以损害他国利益来保护本国利益的做法是不适合的，并且也不具有持久性的。
[Abstract]:Jurisdiction in international law is the basic theory of international law. Jurisdiction involves the most core issues of international law, namely, who will govern a case, who will try a case, and who will carry out the case. In the general theory of international law, jurisdiction is divided into territorial jurisdiction, personal jurisdiction, protective jurisdiction and universal jurisdiction. In theory, territoriality, personal and universal jurisdiction have been studied more in academia, but few studies have been done on the protection of jurisdiction.
The protective jurisdiction belongs to the category of international criminal law. It aims at criminal acts involving foreign factors. For crimes with foreign factors, most of the crimes committed by foreigners are located in a foreign country, and the result of the crime or the object of the crime is the interests of the state or the national of the jurisdiction of the country. The domestic criminal law stipulates the protective jurisdiction, which is beneficial to protect the interests of the internal state from foreign criminal acts. However, the legal system of protective jurisdiction itself is more principled in the domestic legislation and does not stipulate specific measures.
In connection with this situation, all countries have made provisions for the implementation of protective jurisdiction in their domestic criminal law. The provisions on protective jurisdiction have also appeared in the international legislative documents. As these Regulations are scattered in the international legislative documents, there is a lack of a sense of system and protection. In the specific provisions of international legislation, jurisdiction only plays a guiding role in the principle. How to define the protective jurisdiction, how to identify the elements in the protective jurisdiction, and how to implement the protective jurisdiction, there are no specific regulations. In the stage of jurisdiction principle, the legal system that put this principle into practice is still not perfect or even missing.
The purpose of this article is to make a detailed analysis of the protective jurisdiction, starting with the basic theory of jurisdiction, supplementing some contents of the theory of protective jurisdiction, and discussing the implementation mechanism of the protective jurisdiction on the basis of the traditional theory of protective jurisdiction.
The introduction of this article from the significance and angle of the topic, the status quo at home and abroad, and the main methods of research in three aspects. First, from the significance and angle of the topic, the purpose of selecting the protective jurisdiction as the topic of the thesis is to take into account that the social background of the implementation of the extraterritorial jurisdiction has been greatly changed, and more and more offenders are committed. The crime is not confined to the field of one country. More criminal acts are prepared, implemented and the consequences of the crime are far beyond the boundaries between countries. Therefore, criminal activities involving foreign nature have become the main target of domestic criminal law. At the fifty-eight session, a special report on the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction by the state was made, in which she mentioned that "when the State advocates extraterritorial jurisdiction, it is the person, property or behavior that tries to govern its interests outside the country without the relevant rules of international law, with its own legislation, justice or enforcement measures. In the domain, it is mainly criminal law and commercial law. Because people abroad, property or behavior are more likely to affect their interests, a country has a more general tendency to exercise extraterritorial jurisdiction. So as one of the extraterritorial jurisdiction, the protective jurisdiction should also be specific and institutionalized from the legal point of view, and the protective jurisdiction should be concretely and institutionalized. It will demonstrate the conditions of the exercise of protective jurisdiction and how to carry out the implementation of the protective jurisdiction, which makes the protective jurisdiction do not flow to the form, but actually put the jurisdiction system into reality. Secondly, the present study on the status quo at home and abroad shows that the present study on the protective jurisdiction is not yet available. From the point of view of China's jurisdiction, there are few papers and academic works on this area, and the research is limited to the implementation mechanism of the protective jurisdiction, and there is a gap in the study of how to identify the conditions for the exercise of protective jurisdiction; from the perspective of the study of the protective jurisdiction of the foreign countries, the protective management is concerned. The study of jurisdiction is not systematic and incomplete, so it is necessary to carry out systematic and comprehensive theoretical research on the protective jurisdiction. Thirdly, a comprehensive exposition of the protective jurisdiction through different research methods is carried out, for example, the legislative documents based on the protective jurisdiction can be carried out by the method of text research. Through the method of case study, the method of case study can have a comprehensive understanding of the performance of the protective jurisdiction in practice, which is also beneficial to the effective evaluation of various protective jurisdiction implementation measures and the analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of various measures through a comparative method, so as to make the best judgment.
The first chapter of this article mainly outlines the protective jurisdiction, which is divided into three aspects: the concept and characteristics of the protective jurisdiction, the historical evolution, the basis of the protective jurisdiction, the origin of the law and the difference between the protective jurisdiction and the other jurisdiction. Through the summary of these three aspects, it plays the following three roles: (1) introduction of the insurance. The basic theory and legal basis of the protection of jurisdiction for the state to seek a reasonable legal basis for the exercise of the protective jurisdiction of the state; (2) the status of the protective jurisdiction in the international law mechanism is dependent on the legal origin of the protective jurisdiction, by enumerating and analyzing the protective jurisdiction involved in the international law documents and the domestic law of various countries. The provisions concerning the protective jurisdiction can have a correct understanding of the identification of the legal origin of the protective jurisdiction; (3) there are obvious differences between the protective jurisdiction and the territorial jurisdiction, the jurisdiction of the person and the universal jurisdiction. The third section of this chapter, through a comparative method, makes the protective jurisdiction and the other three kinds of management. The jurisdiction is distinguished, and the boundary between the protective jurisdiction and the three jurisdictions in the theory and content is clarified. The first chapter is to lay the foundation for the subsequent discussion of the Constitution and implementation mechanism of the protective jurisdiction. Only in the origin of the theory and the law can the protective jurisdiction be held in the law.
The second chapter of this article expounds the basic elements of the protective jurisdiction, and analyzes the basic elements of the protective jurisdiction in combination with the basic theory of the criminal law, and starts with the requirements of the crime location, the result of the crime, the subject of the crime, the object of the crime, the object of the crime and the criminal offences, and constructs the system of the constituent elements of the protective jurisdiction. In this part, the crime place is divided into the place of the occurrence of the crime and the place of the result of the crime. It focuses on the analysis of the two connection factors, and finds out the relationship between the place of the crime and the occurrence of the result of the crime. Then, the author demonstrates the nationality of the subject of the crime, and makes the situation of the different subject in the protective jurisdiction. Detailed description, for example, how to identify and handle when the subject of a crime is a double or multiple nationality; exceptions, an extensible understanding of the concept of "aliens", and the incorporation of a legal person with foreign nationality into the scope of the subject of the crime, in order to effectively extend the scope of the application of the protective jurisdiction, The state is more effective in protecting the interests of its own country and its citizens in the face of foreign aggression. In this chapter, the requirements for criminal offences are also discussed. In the concept of protective jurisdiction, it is mentioned that only when the criminal act of a foreigner affects the political, economic security, and other important benefits of the internal state, it can apply that jurisdiction. Therefore, the protection is protected. The requirement of the jurisdiction of the crime is different from the other jurisdiction, so it is discussed from the object of the crime and the specific requirements of the term of the sentence, and it is more appropriate to explain the special requirements of the protective jurisdiction to the crime in these two aspects. That is, under which circumstances, the protective jurisdiction can be claimed.
The third chapter of this article makes a detailed analysis of the manifestation of the protective jurisdiction in the special field. This chapter always runs through the crime location and subject in the previous chapter, because the protective jurisdiction that can be embodied in some special fields is different from the general situation, and the special case here is special. The crime place mainly includes the crimes within the aircraft, the maritime crime, mainly the area outside the territorial sea, the adjacent area, the exclusive economic zone, the protective jurisdiction of the high seas, and the protective jurisdiction of the north and south polar regions and the outer space. When the subject of such a crime is subject, the exercise of protective jurisdiction is different from that of the general case. This chapter mainly integrates the exceptions of the protective jurisdiction beyond the general situation into the whole system of protective jurisdiction, which makes the theory of the protective jurisdiction complete and is beneficial to the further study of the protective jurisdiction.
The fourth chapter mainly discusses the extradition measures in the implementation of the protective jurisdiction and is parallel to the state abduction in the fifth chapter. In this chapter, the difficulties in the implementation of the traditional extradition measures to the implementation of the extradition measures are various, for example, in the form of more than two bilateral extradition treaties, the implementation of extradition can only be adopted. Taking the form of state to the state, but not suitable for transnational criminal offences, because the direct consequence of it is the number of countries involved in the case, and it is impossible to require each country to sign a bilateral extradition treaty with another country; the other is the political influence that the country who is requested to extradite is not willing to give the criminal to the other party. In addition, this chapter also discusses how to deal with the nationality of a foreigner in a foreign crime, that is, to deal with the conflict between the protective jurisdiction and the personal jurisdiction. This also requires a new interpretation and understanding of the principle of non extradition of the people. In the practice, the principle of non extradition of nationals limits the exercise of the protective jurisdiction, so we should introduce some new mechanisms to solve the above situation, so as to expand the scope of the application of the protective jurisdiction.
The fifth chapter of this article mainly discusses the other measures in the implementation of the protective jurisdiction, namely the state kidnapping, which is regarded as a violation of the basic principles of international law by most countries and the international community, but there are also relevant cases in practice, and the United States sometimes takes such measures when implementing protective jurisdiction. This chapter introduces the emergence and development of national kidnapping, and demonstrates its legitimacy in international law. This chapter, starting with the Kell rule produced by the state's kidnapping, analyzes the legal problems of the state's kidnapping and several exceptions, such as a specific crime, through the Kell rules. The principle of explicit and appalling behavior excludes the abduction of the state. After the analysis of the legality of the state's abduction, it combines the rights of the country of asylum to claim the right to oppose it, and draws the conclusion of the illegality. In addition, it also analyzes whether the state abduction is currently constituted by international customary law and the state abduction of the United States in the past. In fact, the fact is that most countries and the international community are opposed to the action of the United States, because such acts will undoubtedly harm the jurisdiction of a sovereign state and the jurisdiction of a sovereign state, and misuse will disrupt the normal judiciary. Procedure, although the implementation of protective jurisdiction is still in the present situation.

【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：D997.9

【引证文献】