我国资格刑制度完善研究

发布时间：2018-05-29 03:24

本文选题：资格刑 + 资格罚　；参考：《华南理工大学》2016年博士论文

【摘要】：资格刑作为剥夺犯罪人法定资格的刑罚方法,在国外刑法制度中已占有一席地。我国《刑法》没有明确提出资格刑的概念,但资格刑制度却由来已久。普遍认为,剥夺政治权利和驱逐出境属于我国资格刑制度的范畴。资格刑在应对利用资格实施的犯罪或者侵犯他人资格的犯罪方面,具有不可或缺的刑罚功能。完善我国资格刑制度不仅是有效控制特定犯罪的需要,也是我国刑事制度改革的重要内容之一。笔者认为,资格刑制度的完善不能只局限于对现有资格刑的改良,还需要挖掘和充实更多新型资格刑制度内容。本文基于对资格刑基本理论的理解以及对我国现行资格刑制度存在问题的解析,展开对我国资格刑制度完善的讨论。首先,本文在阐述资格刑制度的刑罚属性和国外资格刑制度成熟经验的基础上,剖析了我国现行资格刑制度的合理性和局限性。并在对资格刑制度自身的利弊进行比较之后,指出了完善我国资格刑制度的必要性。其次,本文以刑罚功能和刑事政策理论为分析工具,着重阐述了资格刑制度存在合理性的法理根据。同时还从法经济学角度,分析了资格刑在控制自身制度成本和犯罪成本方面的优势,为资格刑制度存在的理论根据充实新的内容。再次,论文针对我国现行刑法中规定的剥夺政治权利和驱逐出境两种资格刑性质的刑罚制度作了合理性和局限性评述,并指出了改革两种刑罚制度的必要性和可行性。同时也对剥夺军衔和剥夺勋章、奖章和荣誉称号是否可以被纳入我国资格刑制度范围作了比较详细的论证,阐述了剥夺军衔应当作为资格刑回归到刑法规范当中的法理依据,也提出了剥夺勋章、奖章和荣誉称号非刑罚措施的种种理由。复次,在对资格刑制度内容整合和扩充方面,本文有别于传统移植国外立法经验的研究方法,从我国现有的法律法规中挖掘可以作为资格刑内容的法律资源,其中刑法修正案中的“禁止令”和“禁止从事职业”等非刑罚处置措施,以及广泛散落在各种行政法律法规中的“行政资格罚”是我国资格刑内容扩容的主要资源。最后,本文重点阐述了资格刑的适用方式和适用依据。在适用方式方面,与现行刑罚制度规定的一旦适用资格刑将剥夺犯罪人全部资格的适用方式相比,论文确立的“分立剥夺方式”更能体现资格刑的刑罚价值。在适用依据方面,与现行刑法制度规定的以“犯罪社会危害性”和“主刑种类”作为资格刑适用依据相比,论文确立以“犯罪性质”和“犯罪人格”作为资格刑的适用依据显然更加严谨、科学。此外论文还提出完善资格刑的减刑制度和复权制度作为解决资格刑“处罚过剩”的有效举措。
[Abstract]:Qualification penalty, as a penalty method of depriving the offender of his legal capacity, has occupied a seat in the foreign criminal law system. The concept of qualification penalty is not clearly put forward in Criminal Law of our country, but the system of qualification penalty has a long history. It is generally believed that deprivation of political rights and deportation belong to the category of qualification penalty system in China. Qualification penalty plays an indispensable role in dealing with crimes committed by means of qualifications or crimes against the qualifications of others. Perfecting the qualification penalty system is not only the need to control the specific crime effectively, but also one of the important contents of our country's criminal system reform. The author believes that the perfection of the qualification penalty system should not only be limited to the improvement of the existing qualification penalty, but also need to excavate and enrich more contents of the new qualification penalty system. Based on the understanding of the basic theory of the qualification penalty and the analysis of the existing problems in the current qualification penalty system in China, this paper discusses the perfection of the qualification penalty system in our country. Firstly, on the basis of expounding the penalty attribute of the qualification penalty system and the mature experience of the foreign qualification penalty system, this paper analyzes the rationality and limitation of the current qualification penalty system in our country. After comparing the advantages and disadvantages of the qualification penalty system, the author points out the necessity of perfecting the qualification penalty system in our country. Secondly, based on the function of penalty and the theory of criminal policy, this paper focuses on the legal basis of the rationality of the qualification penalty system. At the same time, from the angle of law and economics, this paper analyzes the advantages of qualification penalty in controlling its own system cost and crime cost, which enriches the new content for the theoretical basis of the existence of qualification penalty system. Thirdly, the thesis comments on the rationality and limitation of the penalty system of deprivation of political rights and deportation, and points out the necessity and feasibility of reforming the two kinds of penalty system. At the same time, it also makes a detailed demonstration on whether the deprivation of military rank and medal, medal and title of honor can be included in the scope of our country's qualification punishment system, and expounds that the deprivation of military rank should be regarded as the legal basis for the return of the qualification penalty to the norms of the criminal law. Reasons for disenfranchisement, medals and honours are also given for non-penal measures. Again and again, in the aspect of integrating and expanding the content of qualification penalty system, this paper is different from the traditional research method of transplanting foreign legislative experience, and excavates the legal resources which can be regarded as the content of qualification penalty from the existing laws and regulations of our country. Among them, the non-penalty measures such as "prohibition order" and "prohibition of occupation" in the amendment of criminal law, and "administrative qualification penalty", which are widely scattered in various administrative laws and regulations, are the main resources for the expansion of the content of qualification punishment in our country. Finally, this paper focuses on the application of qualification penalty and applicable basis. In the aspect of application mode, compared with the existing penalty system that once the qualification penalty is applied, it will deprive the offender of all the qualifications, the "separate deprivation mode" established in this paper can reflect the penalty value of the qualification penalty more. In terms of the applicable basis, compared with the existing criminal law system, "the social harmfulness of crime" and "the type of the main punishment" are used as the basis for the application of the qualification penalty. It is more rigorous and scientific to establish the criminal nature and criminal personality as the applicable basis of qualification penalty. In addition, the paper also puts forward to perfect the commutation system of qualification penalty and the system of reinstatement as an effective measure to solve the excess penalty of qualification penalty.
【学位授予单位】：华南理工大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D924.1

【参考文献】