有毒有害食品犯罪的量刑偏向的实证考察及其实质

发布时间：2018-06-18 02:46

本文选题：有毒有害食品犯罪 + 轻轻重重　；参考：《华东政法大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：通过对有毒有害食品犯罪已经判决的案件进行实证研究和分析，我国有毒有害食品犯罪量刑过程中具有明显的轻轻重重倾向，具体而言，对于食品犯罪的基本情节犯大多使用轻刑和缓刑，而对于食品犯罪的加重情节刑法过度使用重刑，甚至死刑。我国目前的社会现实和法治环境不同于美国当年提出轻轻重重刑事政策的社会背景；同时西方的轻轻重重刑事政策与我国目前所采用的宽严相济的刑事司法政策在刑法思想、刑法模式和语义概念方面存在极大的区别，因此我国有毒有害食品犯罪量刑时不能盲目的移植和适用西方的轻轻重重政策。另外，刑法应对有毒有害食品犯罪时存在严重的量刑反制的现象，所谓量刑反制本质上是在犯罪认定出现疑难问题时司法部门通过比较假定的犯罪的法定刑与行为社会危害性最终确定罪名的行为。量刑反制违反了罪刑法定原则、违反了罪刑均衡原则、违反了正确的定罪量刑顺序，在司法实践中应当予以摒弃。有毒有害食品犯罪在量刑中要防止轻，但主要是要防止重。有毒有害食品犯罪中所体现的“重重”的偏向以及“量刑反制”思想的实质是刑法重刑思维的体现。重刑思维在我国具有悠久的历史，在现代社会重刑思维仍然具有极为广泛的影响力，但是重刑思维不论是从功利的预防犯罪还是从刑法的现代理念而言都是相悖的。重刑思维无力承担起社会管理失范所引起的犯罪控制问题，在预防有毒有害食品犯罪上应当注重前期的行政监管，事前的预防比事后的刑罚惩罚会收到更好的结果。
[Abstract]:Through the empirical study and analysis of the cases that have already been adjudicated on the crime of toxic and harmful food, the sentencing process of the crime of toxic and harmful food in our country has obvious slight tendency, specifically speaking, For the basic circumstances of food crimes, most of them use light punishment and probation, while for the aggravating circumstances of food crimes, excessive use of severe punishment, or even the death penalty. The current social reality and legal environment of our country are different from the social background of the light criminal policy put forward by the United States at that time, and at the same time, the western lightly heavy criminal policy and the criminal justice policy adopted by our country at present are in the criminal law thought. There are great differences between the criminal law model and semantic concept, so we can not blindly transplant and apply the western policy when sentencing the crime of poisonous and harmful food. In addition, when the criminal law deals with the crime of toxic and harmful food, there is a serious phenomenon of counter-sentencing. In essence, the so-called sentencing countersystem is the act that the judicial department determines the crime by comparing the legal punishment and the social harmfulness of the crime with the legal punishment and the social harmfulness of the behavior when there are difficult problems in the criminal identification. Sentencing countersystem violates the principle of legally prescribed punishment for a crime, violates the principle of balance between crime and punishment, and violates the correct order of conviction and sentencing, which should be abandoned in judicial practice. The crime of poisonous and harmful food should be prevented from being light in sentencing, but it should be mainly prevented from being heavy. The "heavy" bias embodied in the crime of poisonous and harmful food and the essence of the thought of "sentencing counter-system" are the embodiment of the thinking of heavy punishment in criminal law. Heavy penalty thinking has a long history in our country, and still has a very wide influence in modern society. However, heavy penalty thinking is contrary to both the utilitarian crime prevention and the modern concept of criminal law. The thinking of heavy punishment can not bear the crime control problem caused by the maladministration of the society. In order to prevent the crime of poisonous and harmful food, we should pay attention to the administrative supervision in the early stage, and the prevention in advance will get better results than the punishment after the punishment.
【学位授予单位】：华东政法大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：D924.3;D924.13

【参考文献】