环境监管失职罪立法问题研究

发布时间：2018-11-16 07:03

【摘要】：1997年,我国新修订的《刑法》第9章渎职罪中的第408条对环境监管失职罪明文规定为:具有环境监管相关职责的国家机关工作人员,具体表现为严重不负责任,客观上引发重大环境污染事故,导致公私财产蒙受重大物质损失或者严重的人身伤亡的行为。但该罪在多年的司法实践中出现了罪名适用率极低、行为定性偏差、刑罚种类单一、明显趋向轻刑化及缓刑和免于刑事处罚不当适用等现象。当然,环境污染事实的隐蔽性、公众环保意识的薄弱、环境刑法的空白等等,都与此有关,但也不能不说,与该罪在立法规定上存在的缺陷不无关联。立法上的缺陷主要表现在以下两个方面:一是,该罪的罪状规定不明确,比如:犯罪主体不明确,哪些国家工作人员具有承担环境保护监督管理的职责之标准不清晰;犯罪主观心态缺乏规定,“严重不负责任”不能准确表征该罪主观心态之内容;犯罪客观方面的规定不精准,行为的表现形式不明确、客观后果要求不合理、犯罪因果关系的判断标准模糊。二是,该罪的刑罚配置不科学,单一的刑种难以区分不同程度、不同情节的犯罪行为的社会危害性;单一的法定刑幅度和三年以下有期徒刑的设置,容易造成量刑不公,司法不公,有违刑法罪责刑相适应原则。鉴于此,环境监管失职罪应当规定为:以具有环境监管职责的公务人员为主体,具体表现为严重不负责任,拒绝履行或者拒绝正确履行环境保护监管职责的行为,主观心态为间接故意或者过失,客观上发生或可能会引发重大环境污染事故,导致公私财产蒙受重大物质损失或者严重的人身伤亡的行为。完善该罪的立法规定,应从以下两个方面着手:一是,在罪状的描述上,科学界定该罪主体为“对环境保护监管工作负有法定职责和直接责任的国家工作人员”,明确该罪存在过失和间接故意两种主观罪过形态,对该罪客观方面作出合理规定,包括行为、结果及其因果关系;二是,在该罪的刑罚配置上,适当考虑增加资格刑和一定的罚金刑,将法定刑幅度提高到五年以下有期徒刑或者拘役,并设置两个不同的刑期档次。
[Abstract]:In 1997, Article 408 of the crime of dereliction of duty in Chapter 9 of the newly revised Criminal Law of China explicitly stipulated that the personnel of state organs with duties related to environmental supervision should be seriously irresponsible. Objectively causing major environmental pollution accidents, leading to public and private property suffered major material losses or serious personal injury behavior. However, in the judicial practice for many years, the crime has a very low rate of application, deviation in the nature of behavior, a single type of penalty, a tendency to light punishment, suspended sentence and improper application of exemption from criminal punishment and so on. Of course, the concealment of the fact of environmental pollution, the weakness of public awareness of environmental protection, the blank of environmental criminal law, and so on, all have something to do with this. The defects in legislation are mainly reflected in the following two aspects: first, the provisions of the crime are not clear, such as: the subject of the crime is not clear, which national staff have the responsibility of environmental protection supervision and management is not clear; The subjective state of mind of the crime lacks the stipulation, "serious irresponsibility" can not accurately express the content of the subjective state of mind of the crime; The objective aspect of crime is not precise, the form of behavior is not clear, the objective consequence is unreasonable, and the judgment standard of crime causality is vague. Second, the penalty allocation of the crime is not scientific, and it is difficult to distinguish the social harmfulness of the criminal acts of different degrees and different circumstances by a single type of punishment; The establishment of a single statutory penalty and imprisonment of not more than three years is likely to result in unfair sentencing and unfair administration of justice, which violates the principle of adapting the criminal law to criminal responsibility and punishment. In view of this, the crime of dereliction of duty of environmental supervision should be defined as: taking the public servants with the duty of environmental supervision as the main body, the concrete manifestation is the act of serious irresponsibility, refusing to perform or refusing to perform the duty of environmental protection supervision correctly, The subjective state of mind is indirectly intentional or negligent, which objectively occurs or may lead to serious environmental pollution accidents, resulting in serious material loss or serious personal injury to public and private property. The legislative provisions of the crime should be improved from the following two aspects: first, in the description of the crime, the subject of the crime should be scientifically defined as "the state functionary who has the legal responsibility and direct responsibility for the supervision of environmental protection". It is clear that there are two forms of subjective guilt: negligence and indirect intent, and reasonable provisions are made on the objective aspects of the crime, including behavior, result and causality. Second, in the penalty allocation of the crime, appropriate consideration should be given to increasing the qualification penalty and a certain fine penalty, raising the range of statutory penalties to fixed-term imprisonment of not more than five years or criminal detention, and setting up two different grades of sentences.
【学位授予单位】：湘潭大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2016
【分类号】：D924.3

【相似文献】