毒品犯罪的“明知”问题研究

发布时间：2018-03-20 16:28

本文选题：毒品犯罪　切入点：明知　出处：《华南理工大学》2014年硕士论文　论文类型：学位论文

【摘要】：随着毒品犯罪的蔓延，最高人民法院、最高人民检察院和公安部等部门相继出台了一系列规范毒品犯罪的规范性文件，对如何认定行为人主观“明知”的方法提供了一些指引和依据。但是，这并没有从根本上解决问题。界定毒品犯罪中“明知”的内容是解决“明知”问题的前提。毒品犯罪中“明知”的内容主要分为两个方面，一是事实性的认识内容；二是违法性的认识内容。在毒品犯罪中，无论是立法上还是司法实践中均存在认定行为人“明知”的困惑。在立法规定上，列举式的规定已经无法满足司法实践的需要；在司法实践中，认定方法没有统一的标准，案件认定过度依赖口供等问题也亟待解决，特别是因为毒品犯罪的特殊性造成的证据单一性、即时性和易破坏性，，更增加了打击毒品犯罪的难度。正因如此，司法实务中一般采用推定来解决这方面的认定困难。通过论证运用推定的可行性及作用证明如果无法直接用证据证明“明知”，则引入推定来认定“明知”是现阶段的最优选择。但推定毕竟是一种次优的认定方法，其本身的或然性决定了运用推定有可能会造成冤假错案。最后，本文将根据推定规则存在的不足，结合司法实践的现状，提出了运用推定应适用的五大原则，通过界定事实推定运用的范围，限制事实推定的随意性，并建议推广毒品案件专业审判庭，加强公检法间的司法协作。
[Abstract]:With the spread of drug crimes, the Supreme people's Court, the Supreme people's Procuratorate and the Ministry of Public Security have successively issued a series of normative documents regulating drug crimes. It provides some guidance and basis on how to identify the subjective "knowing" method of the perpetrator, but it does not fundamentally solve the problem. Defining the content of "knowing" in drug crime is the premise to solve the problem of "knowing". The content of "knowing" in drug crime is divided into two aspects, one is the content of factual cognition; The other is the understanding of illegality. In drug crime, there is the confusion of "knowing" whether in legislation or judicial practice. In legislation, enumeration can not meet the needs of judicial practice; In judicial practice, there is no uniform standard for determining methods, and the problems of excessive reliance on confessions in cases must be solved, especially because of the uniqueness of evidence caused by the particularity of drug crimes, as well as the immediacy and easily destructive nature of the evidence. It has increased the difficulty of cracking down on drug crimes. That's why, In judicial practice, presumption is generally used to solve this problem. If we can not directly prove "knowing" with evidence, then we can use presumption to determine that "knowing" is the current level. But presumption is, after all, a suboptimal identification method. Its probabilistic nature determines that the application of presumption may lead to false and false cases. Finally, according to the deficiency of presumption rules and the present situation of judicial practice, this paper puts forward five principles that should be applied in the application of presumption, and limits the arbitrariness of presumption of fact by defining the scope of application of presumption of fact. It also suggests to promote the specialized court of drug cases and strengthen the judicial cooperation among the Public Security Bureau, the Procuratorate and the Court.
【学位授予单位】：华南理工大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.36

【参考文献】