故意杀人罪死刑限制适用研究

发布时间：2018-05-09 06:09

本文选题：故意杀人罪 + 死刑　；参考：《贵州民族大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：对于“死刑”两个字我们早已耳熟能详，它是以剥夺犯罪分子的生命为标志的刑罚方式，可想而知，死刑也是打击犯罪、维护社会秩序的刑罚方法中最严重的一种。纵观世界，已经有很多国家以成文法的方式废除了死刑，而中国作为东方大国至今还保留死刑的适用，归根结底是受到一些因素的制约，例如：经济因素、政治因素、文化因素，所以基于这些原因，是不可能在现阶段实现废除死刑这一目标。司法实践中往往通过适用死刑来实现惩罚犯罪的目的，久而久之人们开始慢慢意识到死刑所具有的诸多弊端。因此，代表国家行使公权力的立法机关和司法机关通过制定和运用相关的刑事政策来对死刑的限制适用作出政策性的指导和约束。故意杀人罪在侵犯公民人身权利这一章犯罪中作为最严重的犯罪扮演者重要的角色，也是适用死刑最多的罪名。如今在废除死刑和刑罚轻缓化的国际背景下，死刑的限制适用是我国最明智之举。而对故意杀人罪死刑的适用进行限制，从人权的角度出发是保护了被告人基本人权，即生命权；从我国的刑事政策角度考虑，符合了严格限制死刑的政策；从长远目标看，，为我国最终实现全面废除死刑奠定了坚实的理论与实践基础。但是，我国刑法关于故意杀人罪和死刑的法条设置得过于简单，导致在司法实践中法官很难把握量刑的标准，不利于实现死刑限制适用这一目标。本文分为绪论、正文和结语三部分，关于正文部分，笔者将分为三章进行阐述，主要内容如下: 第一章概述，主要介绍故意杀人罪的立法现状、故意杀人罪适用死刑的司法现状以及故意杀人罪死刑限制适用的意义。其中故意杀人罪的立法现状部分主要有罪状设置简单、法定刑幅度过大和法定刑配置的顺序不妥当；故意杀人罪适用死刑的司法现状部分介绍法官的影响因素，即法官首选适用死刑、法官过多适用死刑立即执行以及法官量刑时考虑民愤和社会舆论过多；故意杀人罪死刑限制适用的意义部分包括是废除死刑的最后一道防线、有利于完善故意杀人罪的立法缺陷和有利于培育、塑造普通大众的宽容情感。第二章论述故意杀人罪死刑限制适用的依据，主要是理论依据和政策依据。理论依据包括刑罚的人道性要求、刑罚的公正性要求、刑罚的轻缓化要求、刑罚的效益性要求。政策依据包括宽严相济刑事政策和我国的死刑政策。第三章对故意杀人罪死刑限制适用的举措进行论述。主要包括基于量刑角度的限制和基于工作机制角度的限制。基于量刑角度进行限制主要包括引导民意、被害人过错、被害人的谅解、义愤杀人；基于工作机制角度主要包括司法解释和案例指导制度。
[Abstract]:We are familiar with the word "death penalty" for a long time. It is a punishment method marked by depriving criminals of their lives. It can be imagined that the death penalty is also the most serious method of punishing crime and maintaining social order. Throughout the world, many countries have abolished the death penalty in the form of statutory law, and China, as a large eastern country, still retains the application of the death penalty, in the final analysis, it is restricted by a number of factors, such as economic factors and political factors. Cultural factors, therefore, for these reasons, is not possible at this stage to achieve the goal of abolition of the death penalty. In judicial practice, the purpose of punishing crimes is often realized by applying the death penalty. Over time, people begin to realize the disadvantages of the death penalty. Therefore, the legislative organs and judicial organs acting on behalf of the state to exercise public power make policy guidance and restrictions on the restriction of the application of the death penalty through the formulation and application of relevant criminal policies. The crime of intentional homicide plays an important role as the most serious crime and is also the most applicable crime in the crime of infringing the personal rights of citizens. Nowadays, under the international background of abolishing the death penalty and slowing down the penalty, the restriction of the death penalty is the wisest move in our country. From the perspective of human rights, it protects the basic human rights of the accused, that is, the right to life; from the angle of our country's criminal policy, it conforms to the policy of strictly restricting the death penalty; from the perspective of long-term goals, it is consistent with the policy of strictly restricting the death penalty. It lays a solid theoretical and practical foundation for the ultimate abolition of the death penalty in China. However, the law of intentional homicide and death penalty is too simple in our criminal law, which makes it difficult for judges to grasp the standard of sentencing in judicial practice, which is not conducive to the realization of the goal of restricting the application of the death penalty. This paper is divided into three parts: introduction, text and conclusion. On the text, the author will divide into three chapters to elaborate, the main content is as follows: The first chapter introduces the legislative status of intentional homicide, the judicial status of intentional homicide and the significance of restricting the application of the death penalty. Among them, the legislative status of intentional homicide mainly includes the simple setting of crime, the excessive range of statutory punishment and the improper order of the allocation of statutory punishment; the judicial status quo of the application of the death penalty for intentional homicide introduces the influencing factors of the judge. That is, judges first choose to apply the death penalty, judges overapply the death penalty immediately and judges take into account public indignation and public opinion in sentencing; the significance of restricting the application of the death penalty for intentional homicide includes, in part, the last line of defense against the abolition of the death penalty. It is propitious to perfect the legislative defect of intentional homicide, to cultivate and to mold the tolerant emotion of ordinary people. The second chapter discusses the application of death penalty in intentional homicide, mainly theoretical basis and policy basis. The theoretical basis includes the requirement of humanity, the requirement of fairness, the requirement of mitigation and the demand of benefit. The policy basis includes the criminal policy of combining leniency and severity with the death penalty policy of our country. The third chapter discusses the measures to limit the application of death penalty for intentional homicide. Mainly includes the limitation based on sentencing angle and based on working mechanism. The limitation based on sentencing mainly includes guiding public opinion, victim's fault, victim's understanding, and killing with indignation. Based on the working mechanism, it mainly includes judicial interpretation and case guidance system.
【学位授予单位】：贵州民族大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.34

【参考文献】