需罚性在犯罪论体系中的功能与定位

作为对我国近年来发生争议的热点案件的一个理论回应,需罚性在犯罪论体系中的功能与定位被提出。我国目前的犯罪论体系均是以应罚性为中心展开的,缺乏对需罚性的判断,从而带来严重的理论与实践困境。犯罪论体系须认真对待刑法体系内的应罚性与刑法体系外的需罚性。从理论上,需罚性就是从刑事政策或宪法上判断有无刑罚处罚的必要性,是以预防的必要性为理论根据架设起刑事政策或宪法与刑法体系之间的桥梁,具有兼顾体系正义与个案正义的合目的性。同时,将需罚性导入我国犯罪论体系具有立法与司法基础,与我国实定法之间具有融贯性。我国应当建构应罚性与需罚性并重的犯罪论体系。     

积极的一般预防

报应主义固守正义面缺乏保护社会的灵活性,一般预防重视秩序而有主张专断、残暴之嫌,特殊预防则专注于科学地矫治罪犯而排斥了正义。学者们的各种刑罚一体论模式都实际上并未将三者统一。刑罚根据的统一只有在将刑法系统看作社会大系统的一个有机组成部分、受制于社会大系统的情况下才有可能。根据社会的机能的立场,刑法只保证一点,即与认为规范是无效的意义表达相对抗。刑罚清楚地使犯罪成为一种不值得学习的行为。积极的一般预防理论是建立在刑罚以忠诚于法的市民为对象的基础之上的。报应论、一般预防论和特殊预防论三者只是对刑罚根据的外在表现的揭示。在对这三者的具体分析中可以看到它们内在地统一于积极的一般预防之中。     

论被告人的处遇

刑事审判的运行蕴含着一个"悖论",在强调不应将被告人当作审判对象的同时又不得不针对被告人进行评价,被告人徘徊于主体与客体之间的尴尬境地。刑事审判这个场域中交融着实体和程序两种因素,显示了实体法与程序法发生着一种微妙的相互控制,并彰显了刑事程序的内在魅力。刑事司法运作的逻辑是"审判"先于"犯罪"先于"刑罚"而发生,要实现由"被告人"到"犯罪者"或者"无辜者"的角色定位,这是一项理性的事业,在这个空间里面,程序是第一性的,实体是第二性的。因而,永远不要把被告人当作审判对象,实质是一种程序理想,更是应有的理论立场。     

论犯罪控制视野中的刑事诉讼监督

犯罪控制并非程序正义的对立面,其目的之一即是对公民人权的保障。但是,犯罪控制的＂度＂把握不好就会有害于程序正义的实现。因此,有必要对犯罪控制进行＂度＂的控制,刑事诉讼监督即为方式之一,其关注点是人权与正义。新时期实施刑事诉讼监督,应坚持宽严相济刑事政策,吸取情境预防的经验,理顺法律监督内外部关系。     

论视频监控的犯罪预防功能及犯罪侦查价值

各国的犯罪预防理论发展至今,已经形成了比较完善的犯罪预防体系,主要包括司法预防、社会预防和情景预防三种模式。在我国的犯罪预防体系中,向来重视司法预防和社会预防,而对情景预防关注不够,情景预防措施尚不完善。作为一种对犯罪的干预,视频监控是一种对情境犯罪的干预,研究发掘其在犯罪预防中的作用对完善犯罪预防体系具有重要意义。同时,视频监控系统在犯罪侦查方面也具有重要作用。     

New Labour – New Penology? Punitive Rhetoric and the Limits of Managerialism in Criminal Justice Policy

This paper argues that New Labour's 'tough' stance on law and order has given rise to a criminal justice policy which is based on fundamental contradictions and which involves a substantial retreat from traditional socialist thinking on crime. The continuation of a populist punitive approach ensures the predominance in policy making of a 'criminology of the other' which, in turn, sustains a 'punishment deficit' which fuels public expectations that crime can be controlled effectively by a policy of deterrence through punishment. This populist punitiveness, it is argued, is at odds with another strand of government penal policy, the attempt to secure greater efficiencies and economies by an intensification of managerialism throughout the criminal justice system.     

刑罚个别化的蕴涵:从发展角度所作的考察——兼与邱兴隆教授商榷

本文通过对刑罚个别化演进的考察 ,认为刑罚个别化在其发展的不同阶段蕴涵不同 :在刑罚个别化的萌发时期 ,刑罚个别化在于弥补严格规则主义指导下的罪刑法定主义的不足 ,以促进刑罚的个别正义 ;在近代学派发展的鼎盛时期 ,刑罚个别化演进为以犯罪的个别预防为适用刑罚的出发点 ,以犯罪人的人身危险性为着眼点 ;在现代刑法中 ,刑罚个别化不仅要考虑预防犯罪的需要 ,而且要考虑报应的需要 ,既考虑犯罪的情状 ,也考虑犯罪分子重新犯罪的可能性。本文认为 ,刑罚个别化充满生机 ,不能否定。我国刑法学界对刑罚个别化的研究仍比较薄弱 ,亟待加强     

A System��s Approach to Crime Prevention: The Case of Macao

Macao has the world’s largest casino industry and represents a unique political, social, and cultural system that differs significantly from Western societies. The overall crime rate in Macao is relatively low. Scholarly knowledge about crime and crime prevention in Macao, however, is very limited. This paper first reviews crime prevention theories, typologies, and various strategies in Western societies, followed by an introduction and discussion of crime prevention practices in Macao. Crime prevention strategies in Macao may be characterized as a tripod structure with three major supporting legs: traditional criminal justice practices, social prevention beyond the criminal justice system, and situational crime prevention measures. The paper then discusses the factors that may contribute to the low level of crime in Macao and points out the direction for future research in Macao.     

美国轻罪治理体系的现状、困境及反思

美国轻罪治理体系作为两极化刑事政策中的一极,不仅基于对诉讼效率的追求,开拓了与重罪不同的速决式诉讼机制,还以非刑罚化、刑罚社会化为基本导向,通过多元刑罚处遇实现特别预防和行为规训,修正了传统的刑事处罚模式。轻罪制度在缓解轻罪数量过多与司法资源有限的供需矛盾的同时,也因入罪门槛过低、程序任意性过度,以及罪刑不均而酿生刑法治理危机,其制度设计和缺陷可以给我国提供启示。轻罪化的刑事立法和以轻罪为主体的刑事司法已然成为我国目前刑事法治的重要面向,加快轻罪立法步伐、创建中国特色轻罪治理体系,正成为犯罪治理的关键策略,应进行全面的配套制度跟进,实现犯罪治理的精细化、科学化。     

Legal Responses and Sentencing in Murder Cases – A Comparison of Law and Judicial Reactions in India and Germany

While there are huge cultural, social and socio-legal differences between India and Germany, the sentencing laws of the two countries show a couple of similarities. In India and Germany alike, the substantive law makes only little specifications for the sentencing process. There are no sub-statutory sentencing guidelines, within the range provided by the penal codes the courts have a wide discretion in the sentencing process. It is, however, interesting to see that the courts exercise their discretion in similar ways which can specifically be observed in murder cases. The article describes the legal framework which is applicable in murder cases in India and Germany and compares the judicial decisions in selected cases: hold-up murder, sexually motivated murder, domestic violence killings and honor killings. The comparison gives evidence of the communicative function of punishment. After a serious crime like murder the public – typically well informed by the media, agitated and highly troubled – will in both countries only be settled by a judgment considered as fair, just and proportionate. Peace under the law and internal security, however, do not seem to be dependent on specific forms of punishment. Capital punishment and life imprisonment appear as penalties which may be necessary reactions to murder in a given cultural context, but which are not indispensable to a criminal justice system.     

法定刑设置之比较性研究

在法定刑设置时，不仅需要在同一犯罪申寻求罪行均衡的平衡点，更要从刑法体系的整体考虑中对不同犯罪进行横向比较，从而达到最佳的立法效果。中国刑法中至少有两处法定刑设置不平衡。本文经过比较分析之後，提出相应的建议，希望对今後的立法和司法实践有所裨益。     

Secondary Victimization of Crime Victims by Criminal Proceedings

It is conceivable that criminal proceedings cause psychological harm to the crime victims involved, that is, cause secondary victimization. To investigate this hypothesis, negative and positive effects of criminal proceedings were investigated, as perceived by 137 victims of violent crimes who were involved in trials several years previously. Trial outcome and procedure variables were measured as potential causes of secondary victimization. Results show a high proportion of victims reporting overall negative effects. Powerful predictors were outcome satisfaction and procedural justice, but not subjective punishment severity, interactional justice, and psychological stress by criminal proceedings. The practical implications of the results pertain to whether victims should be advised to report the crime to the police or not, and to appropriate prevention and intervention measures of secondary victimization by criminal proceedings.     

Criminal justice policy and the psychology of peacemaking

Psychology which once was a primary influence on the development of criminal justice policy has, in recent decades, lost much of its ability to inform how laws and policies are made that concern punishment and social control. The reason for psychology's loss of inluence can be traced to the war on crime political rhetoric adopted by politicians and criminal justice administrators. This paper argues that an emerging peacemaking perspective in the criminal justice system allows the discipline of psychology to once again inform the discourse on criminal justice policy. Issues such as drug abuse, gun control, and capital punishment are appropriate subjects for a psychological perspective in the national debate on criminal justice policy.     

罪刑相适应原则在解释论中的贯彻

罪刑相适应不仅是立法原则,还是解释论应当遵循的重要原则,对构成要件的解释具有重要的指导作用。坚持严格区分法条竞合与想象竞合犯,固守"本法另有规定的,依照规定"表明只能适用特别法的先前理解,总是指责立法存在缺陷,必然导致罪刑不均衡的刑法条文比比皆是的现象。我们应当果断摒弃先前错误的理解与做法,在解释论中最大限度地贯彻罪刑相适应原则,充分运用竞合论原理"从一重处断",以实现刑法的公平正义。     

刑事司法解释中的"累犯加重犯"之研究

刑法学界普遍认为关于盗窃罪的司法解释规定了累犯加重处罚原则,违反了罪刑法定原则,侵犯了立法权,应该取消;从抽象的角度来看,司法解释立法化有我国宪法的依据;通过对法定刑的限度以及数额犯的反思,我们认为该司法解释并没有创设累犯加重处罚原则。     

Restoring the Victim: Emotional Reactions, Justice Beliefs, and Support for Reparation and Punishment

Psychological responses to criminal wrongdoing have primarily focused on the offender, particularly on how (and why) offender punishment satisfies people’s need for justice. However, the restoration of the victim presents another way in which the “psychological itch” that injustice creates can be addressed. In the present article, I discuss two lay theories of how crime victims can be restored: a belief that the harm caused to crime victims should be directly repaired (a restorative justice approach) versus a belief that victim harm should be addressed via the punishment of the offender (a retributive justice approach). These two lay theories are discussed with regard to their emotional and ideological determinants, as well as situational and chronic factors that can affect whether people adopt a reparative or punitive “justice mindset” in dealing with victim concerns (and crime in general).     

Public perceptions of white-collar crime and punishment

Although financial losses from white-collar crime continue to exceed those of street crime, the criminal justice system has traditionally focused on the latter. Past research suggested that citizens are more likely to support punitive sanctions for street offenders than white-collar offenders. Recent corporate scandals have increased public awareness of white-collar crime, but whether public attitudes have been altered remains to be determined. Using a 2005 national sample of 402 telephone survey participants, the current study examined citizen perceptions of white-collar and street crime, as well as attitudes regarding apprehension and punishment. This research extended prior studies by also considering the influence of sociodemographic characteristics as well as perceptions of white-collar crime and punishment on the public's support for increasing resource allocation. Implications for future research and development of more effective white-collar crime control policy are discussed.     

Volatile Sovereignty: Governing Crime through the Community in Khayelitsha

This paper asks what crime prevention looks like for residents in informal settlements in Khayelitsha, a black township on the outskirts of Cape Town. It engages with the idea of vigilantism and hybrid policing formations, analyzing the overlaps and intersections between legal community‐based crime prevention initiatives, and local ‘punitive practices’. The focus is not on the intensely violent spectacle of ‘mob justice’, where suspects are killed, but on the more ubiquitous, hybrid formations that also fall on the vigilantism continuum. These include coercive practices such as banishment, corporal punishment, retrieval of stolen goods by local policing formations and, trials conducted by street committees. The core argument I make is that, at times, particularly in poor areas where the state is absent and encourages citizens to take responsibility for their own crime prevention, the boundary between legality and coercive illegality collapses in on itself. Thus, the notion of voluntarism, that is so important to official discourse on crime, is particularly problematic when applied in poor communities with high rates of unemployment and high crime rates. As such, the state's encouraging of citizens to take responsibility for their own safety, alongside a punitive state discourse on crime and criminality, creates the space for illegal vigilante style actions to emerge in the shadow of legal crime prevention initiatives.     

Presidential address: Juvenile justice at the crossroads: Presidential address to the academy of criminal justice sciences

Three interacting factors appear to significantly affect our treatment of youths and thus our juvenile justice policy: ideology, the media, and politics. As a result of these factors, although juvenile violent crime is decreasing, legislatures still advocate a harsh, punitive stance toward youthful offenders. Legislative initiatives have resulted in determinate sentencing for juveniles, more youths handled by the adult criminal court, and more youths sentenced to adult institutions. Recent evidence suggests that the public supports more prevention and early intervention strategies for youths and favors rehabilitation rather than punishment. These conflicting trends suggest that we are at a crossroads: the juvenile justice system can continue its harsh, reactive stance, or it can choose a more proactive approach. The members of the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences have an opportunity to play an active role in the development of criminal justice policy.     

论未成年人恢复性司法的合理性与局限性

恢复性司法是一种通过恢复性程序实现恢复性后果的非正式犯罪处理方法。为考察司法人员与公众对待确定未成年人恢复性司法制度态度,对法官、公众等不同群体作问卷调查,结果表明,法官和公众对未成年人司法制度的诸项改革基本认可。该制度的合理性表现在可减少刑事污点对未成年人的消极影响,有利于恢复受损的社会关系,对违法犯罪的未成年人有积极的矫正作用;其局限性体现在难以满足同罪同罚的刑法原则,难以避免替代性的承担责任的现象等。避免局限性的关键在于要解决恢复性司法与正式司法程序的关系问题。