污染环境罪的注意义务:结果预见还是结果回避——兼论达标排放致污的刑事责任

发布时间：2018-06-03 11:04

本文选题：达标排放 + 新过失论　；参考：《北京理工大学学报(社会科学版)》2015年03期

【摘要】：达标排放致污是否承担过失犯罪的刑事责任,根据不同的过失理论会得出不同的结论。旧过失论强调结果预见义务,入罪门槛相对较低,达标排放致污可能成立过失犯罪;新过失论突出结果回避义务,入罪门槛相对较高,达标排放致污不成立过失犯罪。新过失论的理论和实践告诉我们,只有利显著大于弊,且不会威胁到众多人的生命,不会造成生态浩劫或社会灾难的现代风险行为,才能适用新过失论。企业的排污行为基本不符合新过失论的适用条件。适用新过失论将会给司法造成困难,从保护生态环境出发,企业的排污行为应适用旧过失论,达标排放致污也可能承担刑事责任。
[Abstract]:Different conclusions can be drawn according to different negligence theories. The old negligence theory emphasizes the obligation of result foresee, the threshold of incrimination is relatively low, and the crime of negligent crime may be established when the discharge reaches the standard, and the new theory of negligence stresses the obligation of avoiding the result, and the threshold of incrimination is relatively high, and the crime of negligent crime if the discharge reaches the standard is not established. The theory and practice of new negligence theory tell us that only if the benefits outweigh the disadvantages and do not threaten the lives of many people or cause ecological catastrophe or social disaster can the new negligence theory be applied. The emission behavior of enterprises basically does not meet the applicable conditions of the new negligence theory. The application of the new fault theory will cause difficulties to the administration of justice. In order to protect the ecological environment, the old fault theory should be applied to the enterprise's pollutant discharge behavior, and the pollution caused by the discharge up to the standard may also bear criminal responsibility.
【作者单位】：昆明理工大学法学院;
【基金】：云南省哲学社会科学规划一般项目“环境资源司法保护之检讨”(YB2013038) 云南省教育厅哲学社会科学重点项目“环境公害治理机制之反思与重构”(2013Z146)
【分类号】：D924.3

【参考文献】