公款恶性挥霍的刑法规制

发布时间：2018-05-09 20:05

本文选题：公款 + 恶性挥霍　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：公款恶性挥霍不仅仅是一个道德问题，更是一个法律问题：它侵害了国家工作人员职务行为的廉洁性，激化了社会矛盾，并且具有较大的社会危害性。公款吃喝、公款旅游、超标公车消费等一系列公款恶性挥霍行为都应当加以抑制。不论是个体的公款恶性挥霍行为，还是群体的公款恶性挥霍行为，均易引发进一步的挪用型、侵吞型、渎职型犯罪。目前刑法上有个别条款可以适用于调整公款恶性挥霍的问题，但是仍有部分公款恶性挥霍行为无法受到刑法规范的调整，此外理论上亦缺乏对公款恶性挥霍问题的系统性研究。基于此，有必要对公款恶性挥霍问题作系统分析，进而提出相应立法建议，完善现有法律条文，以期构建一个有效全面的规制体系。全文除引言外，共分为五个部分：第一部分，公款恶性挥霍的基本问题。公款恶性挥霍，，是指出于个人目的，挥霍公款，数额较大，情节严重的行为。公款恶性挥霍可能表现为多种行为方式，其产生与发展，有着一定的历史原因、社会原因。第二部分，考察公款恶性挥霍法律处置的现状。部分公款恶性挥霍行为确实可以纳入到现行立法之中，亦已有相关司法案例，主要集中体现在侵吞型犯罪、挪用型犯罪、渎职型犯罪三类。但为数众多的公款浪费行为，却依然只能依靠一些非刑法手段来调整，如行政法律、纪律处分规定、党内法规中规定的措施。对于如何处理公款恶性挥霍，目前有两种声音：一种是强调现行立法已经可以实现对公款恶性挥霍的规制，如贪污罪、滥用职权罪都可以用以定罪量刑；另一种则提出应当增加新的罪名，专门规制公款恶性挥霍行为。第三部分，进一步论证公款恶性挥霍刑法规制的必要性、可行性以及可能后果。从对法律处置的具体考察来看，以上两种声音都有不足之处，而建立在这两种意见基础上的折衷意见，可能更加妥当：一方面，完善现行立法中有关公款恶性挥霍的规定；另一方面，增加立法，以调整目前尚无规制的，社会危害性较大的公款浪费行为。采取这种折衷意见是刑法补位的需要，是反腐倡廉的需要，是实现罪刑法定的需要，是实现罪刑相适应的需要；而在可行性上，也具备了历史传统与现实条件。当然，这种折衷的做法也可能带来不良后果，但可以解决。第四部分，完善现行立法中有关公款恶性挥霍的规定。通过考察公款恶性挥霍的不同表现形式，将其与现行刑法相关罪名进行融合，进而出台立法或司法解释，将所涉及的恶性挥霍公款行为，明确列入侵吞、挪用、渎职等犯罪的犯罪行为中。第五部分，独立设置公款浪费罪。主要规制那些无法纳入到现行立法中的公款浪费行为。但基于罪刑法定和刑法谦抑性的要求，必须审慎考虑能否设置公款浪费罪，在讨论是否必要的基础上，提出具体的意见。
[Abstract]:The vicious profligacy of public funds is not only a moral issue, but also a legal problem: it infringes on the honesty of the official behavior of the state functionary, intensifies the social contradiction, and has great social harmfulness. A series of excruciating public spending, such as public spending, travel and overspending, should be curbed. Both the individual and the group of public funds are prone to cause further misappropriation, embezzlement and dereliction of duty. At present, there are some articles in criminal law which can be applied to adjust the problem of public funds profligacy, but some of them can not be adjusted by the criminal law norm. In addition, there is a lack of systematic research on the problem of public funds profligacy in theory. Based on this, it is necessary to make a systematic analysis of the problem of vicious profligacy of public funds, and then put forward corresponding legislative suggestions, improve the existing legal provisions, in order to build an effective and comprehensive regulatory system. In addition to the introduction, the full text is divided into five parts: The first part, the basic problem of public funds profligacy. Public funds profligate, refers to for personal purposes, profligate public funds, larger, serious circumstances. Public money profligacy may be manifested in many kinds of behavior, its emergence and development have some historical and social reasons. The second part is to investigate the current situation of the legal treatment of public funds profligacy. Some of the vicious profligacy of public funds can indeed be brought into the current legislation, and there have been related judicial cases, mainly reflected in the embezzlement type crime, misappropriation type crime, dereliction of duty type crime three types. However, a large number of wasteful acts of public funds can only be adjusted by some non-criminal means, such as administrative laws, disciplinary provisions, and measures stipulated in the Party's laws and regulations. There are two kinds of voices on how to deal with the vicious profligacy of public funds: one is to emphasize that the existing legislation can already realize the regulation of the vicious profligacy of public funds, such as the crime of corruption, the crime of abuse of power can be used to convict and sentence; The other suggests that new charges should be added to regulate the vicious profligacy of public funds. The third part further demonstrates the necessity, feasibility and possible consequences of the criminal regulation of public funds profligacy. From the concrete inspection of the legal treatment, the above two kinds of voices have their shortcomings, and the compromise based on these two opinions may be more appropriate: on the one hand, perfect the provisions of the current legislation on the vicious profligacy of public funds; On the other hand, legislation should be added to adjust the unregulated and socially harmful waste of public funds. This kind of compromise is the need of complement of criminal law, the need of combating corruption and advocating clean government, the need of realizing legally prescribed punishment for a crime, the need of adapting crime to punishment, and the possibility of having historical tradition and realistic conditions. Of course, such a compromise may also have adverse consequences, but it can be resolved. The fourth part, consummates the present legislation regarding the public fund profligate stipulation. By investigating the different forms of public funds profligacy, merging it with the relevant crimes of the current criminal law, and then introducing legislation or judicial interpretation, including the malicious profligate public funds involved, it is clearly included in the embezzlement and misappropriation. The crime of dereliction of duty. The fifth part, set up the crime of wasting public funds independently. The main regulation of those can not be incorporated into the current legislation of public money waste behavior. However, due to the requirement of punishment for crimes and modesty of criminal law, we must carefully consider whether the crime of waste of public funds can be set up, and put forward concrete opinions on the basis of discussing whether it is necessary or not.
【学位授予单位】：西南政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】