终身监禁的价值困境及司法适用研究

发布时间：2018-04-01 10:32

  本文选题：终身监禁　切入点：价值困境　出处：《南京大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：随着世界刑罚轻缓化的发展,死刑作为一种剥夺生命的残酷刑罚被越来越多的国家废除,没有废除死刑的国家也试图通过终身监禁制度的适用实现逐步废除死刑的目标。终身监禁其实与我国的无期徒刑是同一概念,二者只是表达方式不同,不能因为我国无期徒刑由于减刑、假释制度存在导致实际执行期限较短就否认终身监禁和无期徒刑的同一性。二者无论从语义内涵、发展背景还是在刑罚中的地位,都属于仅次于死刑的最严厉的自由刑。终身监禁可以划分为可以减刑、假释的终身监禁和不得减刑、假释的终身监禁,我国此次刑法修正案针对贪污受贿犯罪适用的正是不得减刑、假释的终身监禁。我国的不得减刑、假释的终身监禁与美国不得假释的终身监禁在适用主体、罪名以及条件上都是有区别的。在我国的刑罚体系中,终身监禁不属于独立的刑种,也不应当被认定为一种死刑替代措施,它仅仅是无期徒刑的一种执行方式。废除死刑是世界趋势,也是我国刑罚发展的目标,但是我国目前不具备完全废除死刑的条件,因此在贪污受贿犯罪中适用终身监禁符合当下打击贪污受贿犯罪的形势,能够起到震慑作用,符合民意。但是,不能因为终身监禁保留了罪犯的生命就认为这种制度一定就优于死刑。刑罚轻缓化不仅体现在死刑数量的减少上,更需要刑罚质量的轻缓。终身监禁是一种将罪犯永远关押在监狱的刑罚,完全没有考虑到长期监禁对罪犯心理的极大迫害,而且我国目前针对暴力型犯罪也仅规定了限制减刑,对非暴力犯罪的贪污受贿犯罪却规定监禁终身,违反了罪责刑相适应的原则。终身监禁完全断绝了罪犯重归社会的可能性,会导致罪犯不好好进行改造,那么就完全背离的刑罚预防和教育的目的,同时,终身监禁这种过限的报复刑同样会给监狱管理增加成本,与现代的刑罚理念不符,因此该措施不宜扩大适用范围。终身监禁作为我国刑法中一项新规定,在司法实践中同样面临着诸多问题,比如司法解释对终身监禁的适用违背了 "从旧兼从轻"的溯及力原则,终身监禁与重大立功的关系,终身监禁能否适用暂予监外执行,终身监禁是否需要由最高人民法院复核等等,这一系列问题都需要在今后的司法实践中加以明确。本文共分为四个部分:第一部分是终身监禁的概述,介绍了终身监禁制度的历史发展、基本概念、特征以及终身监禁的分类。第二部分将我国的无期徒刑与国外的终身监禁进行了比较,尤其是将我国不得减刑、假释的终身监禁与美国不得假释的终身监禁进行比较,从而对我国的终身监禁进行定位。第三部分分析了终身监禁在现代刑罚理念中的价值困境,从刑罚轻缓化、刑罚目的、刑罚成本等方面进行了分析。第四部分针对我国司法实践中终身监禁的具体适用所面临的问题进行了分析。
[Abstract]:With the development of light punishment in the world, the death penalty, as a cruel penalty of deprivation of life, has been abolished by more and more countries. Countries that have not abolished the death penalty also try to achieve the goal of gradually abolishing the death penalty through the application of the system of life imprisonment. Life imprisonment is actually the same concept as life imprisonment in our country. We can't deny the identity of life imprisonment and life imprisonment because of commutation of sentence and parole system. Life imprisonment can be divided into commutable, parole and non-commutation, parole, life imprisonment, The amendment to the Criminal Law of our country applies to the crime of corruption and bribery, it is the life imprisonment without commutation and parole, and the life imprisonment without parole in our country and the life imprisonment without parole in the United States. In our country's penal system, life imprisonment is not an independent punishment, nor should it be regarded as an alternative to the death penalty. It is only a form of execution of life imprisonment. Abolishing the death penalty is the world trend and the goal of the development of our country's penalty. However, at present, our country does not have the conditions for the complete abolition of the death penalty. Therefore, the application of life imprisonment in corruption and bribery crimes is in line with the current situation of cracking down on corruption and bribery crimes, which can serve as a deterrent and accord with public opinion. This system must not be considered superior to the death penalty because life imprisonment preserves the life of the criminal. The mitigation of punishment is not only reflected in the reduction in the number of death sentences, Life imprisonment is a penalty for keeping criminals in prison forever, without taking into account the great psychological persecution of criminals caused by long-term imprisonment. Moreover, at present, our country has only stipulated a limited commutation of sentence for violent crimes. For crimes of corruption and bribery in non-violent crimes, life imprisonment is stipulated, which violates the principle of the adaptation of crime and punishment. Life imprisonment completely cuts off the possibility of the criminals being returned to society, which can lead to criminals not being properly reformed. Well, the purpose of penalty prevention and education completely deviated from, at the same time, the penalty of retribution, which is too limited for life imprisonment, will also increase the cost of prison administration, which is incompatible with the modern concept of punishment. Therefore, this measure should not be extended. Life imprisonment, as a new provision in our criminal law, also faces many problems in judicial practice. For example, the application of judicial interpretation to life imprisonment violates the retroactive principle of "from the old to the lighter," the relationship between life imprisonment and major meritorious service, and whether life imprisonment can be applied to temporary execution outside prison. Whether or not life imprisonment needs to be reviewed by the Supreme people's Court and so on, this series of problems need to be clarified in the future judicial practice. This article is divided into four parts: the first part is an overview of life imprisonment, This paper introduces the historical development, basic concept, characteristics and classification of life imprisonment. The second part compares life imprisonment in China with life imprisonment abroad, especially the non-commutation of life imprisonment in China. The third part analyzes the value dilemma of life imprisonment in modern penalty concept, from the point of view of penalty mitigation and penalty purpose, it makes a comparison between life imprisonment on parole and life imprisonment on parole in the United States, so as to position the life imprisonment in our country, the third part analyzes the value dilemma of life imprisonment in the modern penalty concept. The fourth part analyzes the problems in the application of life imprisonment in the judicial practice of our country.
【学位授予单位】：南京大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.1
，

本文编号：1695215