利用影响力受贿罪的司法困境与应对

发布时间：2018-05-10 14:07

本文选题：利用影响力受贿罪 + 司法困境　；参考：《山东大学》2017年硕士论文

【摘要】：利用影响力受贿罪是刑法修正案(七)增设的一个新罪名,旨在严厉打击愈演愈烈的国家工作人员的关系密切人受贿现象。但是在八年多的司法实践中,利用影响力受贿罪的案件并不多,且由于犯罪构成要件的个别概念含义模糊、操作性不强,与斡旋型受贿罪存在容易混淆的状况,司法人员在实践中较难把握适用,在司法实践中问题很多。本文分为四个部分对利用影响力受贿罪在司法实践中的困境及如何应对进行研究:第一部分,利用影响力受贿罪的规范构成。主要介绍了利用影响力受贿罪的立法背景、意义及犯罪构成要件,从总体上对本罪的主体、行为方式进行梳理。第二部分,利用影响力受贿罪的司法困境。主要通过实证研究的方法对利用影响力受贿罪在司法实践中存在的问题进行阐述,包括罪名的低利用率、与斡旋型受贿罪存在定性争议的问题。-第三部分,利用影响力受贿罪司法困境的成因。分别从立法和司法两个层面分析导致问题的原因。立法层面的原因包括"为请托人谋取不正当利益"限制了打击面、"关系密切人"的界定不清、与斡旋型受贿罪的界限不清;司法层面的原因包括案件线索发现难、证据获取固定难、案件初查不充分、侦查模式单一、与公诉部门缺少沟通配合、办案干警能力有待提高、办案阻力大。第四部分,利用影响力受贿罪司法困境的应对之策。与第三部分相对应,分别从立法和司法两个层面提出对策。立法层面的对策包括取消"为请托人谋取不正当利益"这一要件、明确"近亲属"及"其他关系密切人"的范围、与斡旋型受贿罪合并成新的一罪;司法层面的对策包括拓宽案件线索来源渠道、把好证据关和及时固证、强化初查工作、科技引领侦查、公诉部门提前介入审查、加强侦查业务培训、强化监督、发布指导性案例。
[Abstract]:The crime of accepting bribes with influence is a new crime in the amendment of Criminal Law (7), which aims to crack down severely on the phenomenon of bribery of close people who are closely related to state functionaries. However, in more than eight years of judicial practice, there are not many cases using influence to accept bribes, and because the individual concept of the elements of the crime is vague and operational, it is easy to be confused with the crime of good offices. It is difficult for judicial personnel to grasp the application in practice, and there are many problems in judicial practice. This article is divided into four parts to study the predicament and how to deal with the crime of bribery with influence in the judicial practice: the first part, the normative constitution of bribery crime with influence. This paper mainly introduces the legislative background, significance and elements of the crime of accepting bribes with influence, and generally combs the subject and behavior of the crime. The second part, the use of influence bribery crime of the judicial dilemma. Mainly through the method of empirical research to use the influence of bribery in the judicial practice of the problems, including the low utilization rate of charges, and the mediation crime of bribery there is a qualitative dispute between the question .- the third part, The causes of the Judicial predicament of bribery Crime by using influence. Respectively from the legislative and judicial levels to analyze the causes of the problem. The reasons at the legislative level include: "seeking improper interests for the trustee" limits the scope of the attack, the definition of "close person" is unclear, and the boundary between the crime of mediation bribery is not clear, and the judicial level includes the difficulty of finding the case clue. It is difficult to obtain the evidence, the initial investigation of the case is not sufficient, the investigation mode is single, the communication and cooperation with the public prosecution department is lacking, the ability of the police to handle the case needs to be improved, and the resistance to handling the case is great. The fourth part, take advantage of the influence of bribery crime to deal with the judicial dilemma. Corresponding to the third part, respectively from the legislative and judicial two levels of countermeasures. The countermeasures at the legislative level include abolishing the element of "seeking improper interests for the trustee", clarifying the scope of "close relatives" and "other close persons", and merging with the crime of mediation bribery into a new crime; The countermeasures at the judicial level include broadening the channels of case clue sources, closing the evidence and consolidating the evidence in time, strengthening the work of initial investigation, leading the investigation by science and technology, intervening in the examination in advance by the public prosecution department, strengthening the training of the investigation business, and strengthening the supervision. Issue guidance cases.
【学位授予单位】：山东大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.392

【相似文献】