论特殊累犯的溯及力问题

发布时间：2018-02-25 15:44

本文关键词： 特殊累犯溯及力价值权衡　出处：《吉林大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：刑法修正案（八）对特殊累犯的规定进行了修改，扩大了特殊累犯的成立范围，使得特殊累犯因新旧刑法的规定不一致而产生了涉及溯及力的法律适用问题。特殊累犯的成立条件可以拆分为前罪与后罪两部分，当行为人在刑修（八）生效后实施后罪，且前后罪结合符合了新法关于特殊累犯的规定，但依旧法该前后罪结合并不符合特殊累犯的规定，此时该如何适用法律便成为问题。最高人民法院《关于〈中华人民共和国刑法修正案（八）〉时间效力问题的解释》对此类特殊累犯的时间效力问题进行了说明，认为只要前罪或后罪发生在刑修（八）生效后即适用新法处理。但这种处理方式是否有违反刑法从旧兼从轻的禁止溯及既往原则存在争议，为了解决这一问题，明晰特殊累犯因法律变动而带来的适用问题，有必要对特殊累犯的溯及力问题加以研究。本文通过历史分析方法、文本分析方法和演绎归纳推理方式对特殊累犯的溯及力问题进行研究。第一，，本文找出了特殊累犯会因为刑法变动而产生溯及力问题的两个原因：一是刑法本身因简洁性而无可避免地在许多问题上“留白”，而我国目前的立法技术尚待提高，在特殊累犯方面的立法规定又无法通过合理的解释方式对特殊累犯的溯及力问题进行完善的解释；二是特殊累犯与溯及力向来非我国刑法学者的关注重点，鲜有深入研究这两个问题的学者，更勿论将此二者进行结合性思考，况且特殊累犯的溯及力问题非常微观，并不引人注目。第二，本文认为以往学者对累犯从严处罚的根据的解释主要从人身危险性、社会危害性和主观恶性几方面入手总是难以完善地解释累犯问题。经过对刑法累犯规定的解读和刑事司法实践的分析，对累犯从严处罚较为合理的解释应该是累犯者在刑罚体验能力上逊于一般人，或者是刑法规范体系上认为累犯从严处罚的原因就在于其违背了刑法关于特殊累犯的相关规定，符合了特殊累犯的“修正”构成要件。为了能更全面多方面地考虑特殊累犯与法不溯及既往原则的关系，可以将人身危害性、刑罚体验能力缺陷和符合构成要件三个理论均纳入思考的范围。第三，法不溯及既往原则的理论基础从法的预先公布及可预见性发展到既得权理论，再到近代的法治国理论与信赖利益保护理论。在这些理论的视角下，特殊累犯因为其法律效果之加重不可避免地涉及对前罪的再次评价，因而都违背了法不溯及既往的原则。要解决法不溯及既往原则与特殊累犯之间的矛盾，做出二者之间的选择，有必要对二者的价值进行权衡与比较。第四，特殊累犯的时代价值在于回应了民众朴素的正义观的同时能够预防犯罪和保护特定的社会利益，而法不溯及既往原则的现代价值则在于维护秩序、保障自由和保证平等。二者价值相互比较，我们可以发现法不溯及既往的价值更为基础与关键，是构成现代法治社会的基石。综上，本文给出的结论是我们在特殊累犯与法不溯及既往原则的冲突中应当选择坚持法不溯及既往原则。
[Abstract]:The amendment of the Criminal Law ( 8 ) has made a modification to the provisions of the special progressions , which has expanded the scope of the establishment of the special progressions , which makes the special progressin the law applicable to the retroactivity due to the inconsistency of the provisions of the new and old criminal law . Based on the historical analysis method , the text analysis method and the deduction induction reasoning method , the article finds out the two reasons for the retroactivity of the special Recidivism . First , this paper finds out the two reasons for the retroactivity of the special Recidivism because of its simplicity . Second , this paper holds that the explanation of the author ' s strict punishment is always difficult to explain the progressive problem from the aspects of personal danger , social harmfulness and subjective malignant . The third , the theory of non - retroactivity and the prior principle from the pre - publication and the predictability of the law to the vested right theory , then to the modern rule of law country theory and the trust interest protection theory . In the perspective of these theories , the special Recidivism , because of the emphasis of its legal effect inevitably involves the re - evaluation of the former crime , therefore all goes against the non - retroactivity of the law and the past principle . To solve the contradiction between the non - retroactivity of the law and the special progressin , make the choice between them , and it is necessary to weigh and compare the value of the two . Fourthly , the value of the times of special progressions is to respond to the plain view of justice of the public while being able to crime prevention and protect the specific social interests , while the modern value of the non - retroactivity and past principles lies in the maintenance of order , the guarantee of freedom and the guarantee of equality . The two values are compared , and we can find that the law does not go back and the past value is more basic and key , and is the cornerstone of modern rule of law society . In conclusion , the conclusion is that we should choose to adhere to the non - retroactivity and the previous principles in the conflicts between the special progressions and the non - retroactivity of the law and the prior principles .

【学位授予单位】：吉林大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.1

【参考文献】