以敲诈勒索罪规制信访行为的教义学批判

发布时间：2018-04-11 22:45

本文选题：信访行为 + “要挟”政府　；参考：《法律适用》2016年09期

【摘要】：以敲诈勒索罪规制信访行为已然成为当前地方政府减少、遏制各类非正常信访的惯用手法,但该定罪逻辑表面上似乎于法有据,实则并未对敲诈勒索罪的犯罪构成展开规范诠释,属于背离规范目的的僵化适用刑法规定。信访行为虽然给政府造成巨大压力,但因不具有法律上的"可非难性",不能评价为对政府的威胁或要挟。政府是敲诈勒索罪适格对象的前提预设不能成立,政府只能在宪法和法律规定的范围内依法行政,不具有被精神强制的可能性,也不可能基于精神强制处分公共财物。政府工作人员没有处分公共财物的权能和地位,"三角恐吓"理论不能证成信访行为构成敲诈勒索罪。在信访维权过程中,信访人主观上缺乏"非法占有的目的",其从政府处获得财物具备相应的法律依据和事实根据。因此,以敲诈勒索罪规制信访行为并无正当性和合法性。
[Abstract]:The crime of extortion to regulate the behavior of petition has become the current local government to reduce, curb all kinds of abnormal letters and visits, but the logic of the conviction seems to have a legal basis.In fact, the crime of extortion is not interpreted in a normative way, and it belongs to the rigid application of criminal law which deviates from the purpose of the norm.Although the action of petition causes great pressure to the government, it can not be evaluated as a threat or threat to the government because it does not have the legal "reproach".The premise that the government is the appropriate object of the crime of extortion cannot be established, the government can only administer according to law within the scope of the constitution and the law, and it has no possibility of being compelled by the spirit, nor can it dispose the public property on the basis of the spirit.Government workers do not have the power and status to dispose of public property, and the theory of "triangular intimidation" cannot be proved to constitute the crime of extortion.In the process of protecting the rights of petition, the petitioners lack the purpose of illegal possession subjectively, and the property obtained from the government has the corresponding legal and factual basis.Therefore, the crime of extortion to regulate the behavior of petition is not legitimate and legitimacy.
【作者单位】：中国人民大学刑事法律科学研究中心;
【基金】：中国人民大学2015年度拔尖创新人才培育资助计划成果
【分类号】：D924.3

【相似文献】