巨额财产来源不明罪的适用困境及对策探析

发布时间：2018-06-02 00:53

本文选题：巨额财产来源不明 + 不能说明　；参考：《西南政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：法律条文总是带着制定时期的时代烙印。随着社会经济的腾飞，，政治变革的深入，制定时的特定条件发生了改变，此时，法律与现实情况难免产生冲突，因而需要及时的修正或者作出合理的解释以适应发展变化的社会生活。我国刑法中的巨额财产来源不明罪是1997年首次规定的将其纳入贪污贿赂罪一章的。随着贪腐现象的日益猖獗，反腐工作的深入开展，该罪的相关规定在适用中显现出许多缺陷，特别是法定刑较其他贪污、贿赂罪过轻，无法适应现实中遏制贪腐歪风、打击犯罪的迫切需求，因此2009年全国人大常委会通过的《中华人民共和国刑法修正案（七）》，提高了该罪的法定刑。根据我国刑法的原有规定，犯此类罪应当被判处最高五年有期徒刑，而该修正案中明确规定了该罪的最高刑期为十年有期徒刑。尽管修正案七在一定程度上提高了法定刑，但是这样的方式并没有改变该罪在贪污贿赂罪一章中法定刑偏低，量刑幅度简单的问题。由此在很大程度上影响了刑罚体系化，也无法解决该罪在适用中的困境，本文探讨本罪适用困境的具体表现以及造成此现象的深层原因，并大胆探析对策以谋求解决适用困境之道。本文约三万五千字，除引言部分，主体分为三大部分：第一部分，该罪的适用困境主要表现在：一是该罪司法程序启动具有附随性，该罪司法程序的启动一般伴随其他贪污贿赂犯罪侦办过程中无法确定巨额财产来源时方可启动侦查，缺乏普适性和独立性。二是实践中对于犯罪主体认定困难，缺乏统一标准造成承办具体案件的司法人员对主体范围认定不同，这违背了罪刑法定的原则，损害了刑法的权威性和确定性。三是本罪的共犯和自首认定也存在着困难，本罪特殊的犯罪构成，使得共犯和自首的认定存在着一定的特殊性。第二部分，造成巨额财产来源不明罪适用困境的原因：一是法理原因，包括该罪设置的价值选择冲突，即公正与效益价值选择的冲突；关于本罪犯罪类型之争，集中在于持有型犯罪和不作为犯罪的分歧；对于“不能说明”的性质认定困难，即其是否为犯罪构成要件的争议。二是制度原因，缺乏完善的前置性制度——财产申报制度，没有完善的前置性制度，就使得该罪作为不作为犯罪缺乏必要的逻辑构成要件；且没有有效的监管来保障财产申报制度的落实。三是立法原因，法律规范的设计存在缺陷，表现为罪状描述存在歧义，主体范围界定不明，财产范围简单模糊；入刑门槛过高破坏刑法体系的合理性；刑罚设置的不合理，包括法定刑较低，量刑幅度粗糙简单缺少档次。正是由于这些原因，使得该罪在适用中存在着很多问题而饱受诟病，甚至一度出现废除该罪名的呼声。第三部分，解决巨额财产来源不明罪适用困境的对策：首先，建立完善的财产申报制度，具体而言，通过明确财产申报制度的法律地位，构建体系的官员财产申报制度，对申报工作实施有效监管的具体措施来实现。其次，完善刑法的相关规定，包括降低入刑门槛，保证刑法体系的合理性，提高该罪的法定刑，增设量刑幅度，明确办案标准（包括主体范围与财产范围）指导司法实践。通过前期制度构建，根源上弥补法理和制度缺陷，再通过完善现行法律，细化办案标准，使得该罪摆脱适用困难的尴尬处境，避免修改罪名甚至废除法律的极端手段，保障刑法的稳定性和权威性。
[Abstract]:The legal provisions always bring the time brand of the period of formulation. With the development of the social economy, the deepening of the political change, the specific conditions of the formulation have changed. At this time, the law and the reality are unavoidable to conflict, so it is necessary to correct or make a reasonable explanation to adapt to the social life of the development and change. The crime of unidentified sources of property is a chapter of the crime of corruption and bribery for the first time in 1997. With the increasing rampant corruption and the deepening of the anti-corruption work, the relevant provisions of the crime show many defects in its application, especially the legal punishment than other corruption and the light of bribery. The urgent need to fight crime is raised. Therefore, the People's Republic of China criminal law amendment (seven), adopted by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress in 2009, has raised the legal penalty for the crime. According to the original provisions of the criminal law of China, the criminal offence should be sentenced to five years' imprisonment, which clearly stipulates that the maximum term of the crime is ten years. Although the amendment seven has raised the legal penalty to a certain extent, this way does not change the problem that the crime is low and the range of sentencing is simple in the one chapter of the crime of corruption and bribery. This has greatly influenced the system of punishment and can not solve the plight of the crime in its suitable use. This article discusses the dilemma of this crime. The concrete manifestation and the underlying causes of this phenomenon, and boldly explore countermeasures to seek solutions to the plight of application.
There are about thirty-five thousand words in this article. Besides the introduction, the main body is divided into three parts.
The first part, the plight of the crime is mainly manifested in the following: first, the judicial procedure of the crime is attached to the crime, and the initiation of the judicial procedure of the crime is generally associated with the lack of universality and independence in the process of determining the huge source of property in the process of the detection of other corruption and bribery crimes. Two is the difficulty of identifying the subject of the crime in practice. It is difficult and lack of unified standards to cause the judicial personnel to undertake specific cases to identify different subject areas, which violates the principle of legality and damages the authority and certainty of the criminal law. Three it is also difficult to identify the accomplices and confession of the crime and the special criminal constitution of the crime, which makes the identification of the accomplice and surrender certain special characteristics. Great disparity.
The second part, the cause of the plight of the crime of unidentified property: one is the legal reason, including the conflict of value selection of the crime, that is, the conflict of the value choice of justice and benefit; the dispute about the crime type of the crime is concentrated on the differences of the crime of holding and the inaction, and the nature of "cannot be explained". It is difficult, that is, whether it is a dispute about the constitutive elements of the crime. Two is the institutional cause, the lack of a perfect prepositional system - the property declaration system, and the lack of a perfect prepositional system, which makes the crime lack of necessary logical components as a crime of inaction; and there is no effective supervision to ensure the implementation of the property declaration system. Three is the establishment of the system. There are defects in the design of legal norms, such as the ambiguity in the description of the crime, the unclear definition of the scope of the subject, the simple and vague scope of the property; the reasonableness of the penalty threshold which is too high to destroy the criminal law system; the unreasonable penalty setting, including the lower legal punishment, the rough and simple lack of the scope of the sentencing, is precisely because of these reasons. There are many problems in the application of crime, which has been criticized and even called for the abolition of the charge.
The third part, the solution of the plight of the plight of the crime of unidentified property: first, to establish a perfect property declaration system, specifically, to establish the system of property declaration system by defining the legal status of the property declaration system, and to implement the concrete measures for the effective supervision of the declaration work. Secondly, to improve the relevant regulations of the criminal law. It includes reducing the threshold of entry to punishment, ensuring the rationality of the criminal law system, raising the legal punishment of the crime, adding the range of sentencing, making clear the standard of handling the case (including the scope of the subject and the scope of property) to guide the judicial practice. Through the construction of the earlier system, the legal and institutional defects are made up to the root of the system, and the crime standard is refined through the improvement of the current law, so that the crime is made to make the crime We should get rid of the awkward situation of applying difficulties and avoid modifying the charges or even abolishing the extreme means of the law so as to ensure the stability and authority of the criminal law.
【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】：D924.392

【参考文献】