我国刑事禁止令立法研究
发布时间：2018-11-02 18:48
【摘要】：我国刑事禁止令指的是人民法院针对《刑法修正案(八)》规定的特定主体依据犯罪分子的具体犯罪情况做出的禁止犯罪分子在法律规定的合理期限内从事特定活动、进入特定区域和场所、接触特定的人以约束或者限制犯罪行为人行为的措施。我国刑事禁止令以特殊预防的目的,针对的是犯罪行为人的社会危险性。刑事禁止令的特殊预防性也决定在刑事制裁体系中不属于刑罚而属于保安处分,刑事禁止令是保安处分性质的措施。我国刑事禁止想实现确保非监禁刑的执行效果甚至更深层次的立法目的,依赖的是刑事禁止令在我国的广泛、合理地适用。刑事禁止令的适用现状所体现的禁止令立法的实然效果表明禁止令的立法效果没有达到理想状态。禁止令的适用率低、适用乱、适用不合理等现象阻碍了刑事禁止令在我国的推广和发展,使刑事禁止令对于非监禁刑的执行保障和犯罪预防的目的无法实现。这其中存在司法消极、执行效果不佳致使法官不愿适用等原因,但是根本上是由于立法本身不完善导致无法有效的指导司法活动。立法方面的缺陷在于立法数量较少可以作为司法依据的法律法规有限,更重要的是目前指导刑事禁止令适用的法律规定本身存在诸多问题。禁止令适用对象狭窄不能满足禁止令广泛适用的需要且存在较大的扩展空间;适用内容不够合理如过度关注被害人保护忽视了特殊预防的目的;适用标准混乱导致禁止内容宣告的不合理;违反禁止令的法律后果不明确造成体系混乱;执行方法缺失使得执行存在乱象。这些立法上存在的问题是导致禁止令适用现状堪忧的主要原因,我国刑事禁止令的完善首先应当从立法的完善开始,立法的完善需要有针对性的进行。首先要对禁止令的适用对象进行合理扩张,主要将禁止令的适用对象扩大到假释犯以及未成年人。要对禁止令适用的内容重新归置和明确,设立庭前调查作为在适用禁止令的依据,在执行方面要针对不同的禁止规定制定不同的执行方法,使执行方式得到确定和统一。立法的完善不是盲目的创设法律,而是在原有的法律法规的基础上结合现有的司法实践进行完善,这是一个结合我国具体实践循序渐进的修整过程。
[Abstract]:The criminal prohibition order of our country refers to the people's court's prohibition against a specific subject specified in the Criminal Law Amendment (8) on the basis of the specific criminal circumstances of the criminal element, which prohibits the criminal from engaging in specific activities within a reasonable period of time prescribed by the law, Measures to restrict or restrict the behavior of the perpetrator by entering a specific area or place and contacting a specific person. The criminal prohibition order in our country aims at the social danger of the perpetrator for the purpose of special prevention. The special prevention of the criminal prohibition order also decides that it is not a penalty but a security measure in the criminal sanction system, and the criminal prohibition order is a measure of the nature of the security sanction. The criminal prohibition of our country wants to realize the enforcement effect of non-imprisonment penalty even deeper legislative purpose, depends on the extensive and reasonable application of the criminal prohibition order in our country. The actual effect of the prohibition order legislation reflected by the application of the criminal prohibition order shows that the legislative effect of the prohibition order does not reach the ideal state. The low application rate of prohibition order, chaos and unreasonable application hinder the promotion and development of criminal prohibition order in our country, so that the purpose of enforcement guarantee and crime prevention of non-custodial penalty can not be realized. There are some reasons, such as negative judicature, poor execution result in judges unwilling to apply, and so on, but the reason is that the legislation itself is not perfect, which can not guide judicial activities effectively. The limitation of legislation lies in the limited number of laws and regulations which can be used as judicial basis. More importantly, there are many problems in the current legal provisions that guide the application of criminal restraining orders. The narrow object of prohibition order can not meet the need of wide application of prohibition order and there is a large expansion space; the content of the prohibition order is unreasonable, such as paying too much attention to the protection of the victim and neglecting the purpose of special prevention. The confusion of the applicable standards leads to the unreasonable proscription of the prohibited content; the unclear legal consequences of the violation of the prohibition order lead to the confusion of the system; the lack of enforcement method makes the execution chaotic. The problems in these legislation are the main reasons that cause the application of the prohibition order to be worrying. The perfection of the criminal prohibition order in our country should begin with the perfection of the legislation, and the perfection of the legislation should be carried out pertinently. First of all, it is necessary to expand the applicable object of prohibition order, mainly to parole offenders and minors. It is necessary to re-place and clarify the content of the prohibition order, to set up a pre-court investigation as the basis for the application of the prohibition order, and to formulate different execution methods according to different prohibition provisions in the execution, so that the execution method can be determined and unified. The perfection of legislation is not to create the law blindly, but to perfect the existing judicial practice on the basis of the original laws and regulations, which is a gradual and orderly process combining the concrete practice of our country.
【学位授予单位】：山东科技大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.1
本文编号：2306651
[Abstract]:The criminal prohibition order of our country refers to the people's court's prohibition against a specific subject specified in the Criminal Law Amendment (8) on the basis of the specific criminal circumstances of the criminal element, which prohibits the criminal from engaging in specific activities within a reasonable period of time prescribed by the law, Measures to restrict or restrict the behavior of the perpetrator by entering a specific area or place and contacting a specific person. The criminal prohibition order in our country aims at the social danger of the perpetrator for the purpose of special prevention. The special prevention of the criminal prohibition order also decides that it is not a penalty but a security measure in the criminal sanction system, and the criminal prohibition order is a measure of the nature of the security sanction. The criminal prohibition of our country wants to realize the enforcement effect of non-imprisonment penalty even deeper legislative purpose, depends on the extensive and reasonable application of the criminal prohibition order in our country. The actual effect of the prohibition order legislation reflected by the application of the criminal prohibition order shows that the legislative effect of the prohibition order does not reach the ideal state. The low application rate of prohibition order, chaos and unreasonable application hinder the promotion and development of criminal prohibition order in our country, so that the purpose of enforcement guarantee and crime prevention of non-custodial penalty can not be realized. There are some reasons, such as negative judicature, poor execution result in judges unwilling to apply, and so on, but the reason is that the legislation itself is not perfect, which can not guide judicial activities effectively. The limitation of legislation lies in the limited number of laws and regulations which can be used as judicial basis. More importantly, there are many problems in the current legal provisions that guide the application of criminal restraining orders. The narrow object of prohibition order can not meet the need of wide application of prohibition order and there is a large expansion space; the content of the prohibition order is unreasonable, such as paying too much attention to the protection of the victim and neglecting the purpose of special prevention. The confusion of the applicable standards leads to the unreasonable proscription of the prohibited content; the unclear legal consequences of the violation of the prohibition order lead to the confusion of the system; the lack of enforcement method makes the execution chaotic. The problems in these legislation are the main reasons that cause the application of the prohibition order to be worrying. The perfection of the criminal prohibition order in our country should begin with the perfection of the legislation, and the perfection of the legislation should be carried out pertinently. First of all, it is necessary to expand the applicable object of prohibition order, mainly to parole offenders and minors. It is necessary to re-place and clarify the content of the prohibition order, to set up a pre-court investigation as the basis for the application of the prohibition order, and to formulate different execution methods according to different prohibition provisions in the execution, so that the execution method can be determined and unified. The perfection of legislation is not to create the law blindly, but to perfect the existing judicial practice on the basis of the original laws and regulations, which is a gradual and orderly process combining the concrete practice of our country.
【学位授予单位】：山东科技大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：D924.1
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 陈伟;;“人身危险性”与“社会危险性”的纠缠与厘定[J];法治研究;2016年03期
2 白鑫森;;从业禁止适用范围探究[J];甘肃社会科学;2016年01期
3 张文杰;;刑事禁止令本土化的困境与出路[J];华中师范大学研究生学报;2015年04期
4 刘夏;;保安处分视角下的职业禁止研究[J];政法论丛;2015年06期
5 赵秉志;袁彬;;中国刑法立法改革的新思维——以《刑法修正案(九)》为中心[J];法学;2015年10期
6 利子平;章洁;;刑事禁止令之性质探究[J];南昌工程学院学报;2015年05期
7 敦宁;;后劳教时代的刑事制裁体系新探[J];法商研究;2015年02期
8 龙长海;;刑事禁止令与刑法溯及力[J];求是学刊;2015年02期
9 叶良芳;;禁止令的法律性质及其司法适用——最高人民法院第14号指导案例评析[J];浙江学刊;2014年04期
10 张永强;;规范与进路:预防本位下刑法禁止令之定性[J];西南政法大学学报;2013年05期
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 赵维民;;对“接触特定人”应有列举禁止规定[N];检察日报;2011年
相关硕士学位论文 前3条
1 胡懿娴;刑事禁止令司法适用研究[D];西南大学;2013年
2 葛立刚;刑事禁止令的立法分析与司法适用[D];华东政法大学;2012年
3 马春蓉;刑事禁止令制度初探[D];华东政法大学;2012年
，本文编号：2306651
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/xingfalunwen/2306651.html
